politheft

874 RAYMOND PAQUETTE VICTIM OF CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY TALK

2006-07-15T09:38:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK POLITHEFT
JULY 13,2006
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON TUES,WED,THURS
TEL (613) 235-0617
OTTAWA SEE http://politheft.blogspot.com
FAX (613) 235-5573
ONTARIO K2POY5

DEAR HEAD OF NATION
RAYMOND PAQUETTE VICTIM OF CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY TALK:

RAYMOND STARTED LIVING WITH HIS AUNT MARGO HUNTER
IN DECEMBER
1991
AFTER THE CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY (CAS)
OF THE COUNTY OF LANARK AND THE TOWN OF SMITH FALLS
OBTAINED AN ORDER FROM JUDGE ALLEN SHEFFIELD DATED
DECEMBER 19,19091
WITHOUT JUDICIALLY ACCEPTABLE EVIDENCE
TO PLACE
RAYMOND PAQUETTE,
TREVOR PAQUETTE,
MACY PAQUETTE
WITH THEIR AUNT MARGO HUNTER.

EVERY JUDICIAL HEARING SUBSEQUENT TO THAT
ILLEGAL
TAKING OF THE CHILDREN IS A
FRAUDULENT JUDICIAL PROCEEDING HAVING
NO JUDICIAL AUTHORITY.

DURING THESE FRAUDULENT PROCEEDINGS
DENISE UNHULA
ON BEHALF OF CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY
103 BRIDGE STREET
CARLETON PLACE
ONTARIO K7C EV3
NOT
LANARK C.A.S.
MADE AN APPLICATION TO THE
CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION BOARD
UNDER SEC 5C OF THE
COMPENSATION FOR VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT R.S.O. 1990 C 24
AND THE BOARD
WITHOUT A HEARING
FOUND THE VICTIM RAYMOND
A VICTIM OF A CRIME OF VIOLENCE,
NAMELY SEXUAL ASSAULT
CONTRARY TO
SECTION 271 OF THE CRIMINAL COURT (NO CONVICTION)
AND ORDERED $7,000.00 FOR COUNSELING FOR THE
SUPPOSED VICTIM
RAYMOND.
THIS MONEY WAS NOT PAID OUT FOR COUNSELING
BUT PAID INTO THE
ACCOUNTANT OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
GENERAL DIVISION
ACCOUNT NO 443407 TO BE PAID OUT TO RAYMOND
AFTER HIS 18TH BIRTHDAY.

NO MONEY HAS BEEN PAID OUT TO RAYMOND WHO IS NOW 18.

RAYMOND HAD NO COUNSELLING
BECAUSE HE HAD NEVER BEEN PROVED TO HAVE BEEN
SEXUALLY ABUSED.

DENISE UNHULA MADE THE APPLICATION FOR THE
CARLETON PLACE CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY &
NOT FOR THE CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY OF
THE COUNTY OF LANARK AND THE TOWN OF SMITH FALLS
SO THAT WHEN SHE GOT THE
FRAUDULENTLY OBTAINED MONEY
SHE COULD PAY IT OUT TO HERSELF AND OTHERS FOR
COUNSELING.

THE ACCOUNTANT FRAUDULENTY KEPT THE FUNDS FOR
11 AND 1/2 YEARS DURING WHICH TIME THE
ACCOUNTANT
DEDUCTED MOSTLY MONTHLY THE FOLLOWING FEES
(1) TRANSACTION COMPENSATIONJULY 31,2000 $1.27 (NONE)
(2) ANNUAL MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION .60% $5.04 (NONE)
(3) GOODS AND SERVICES ACT COMPENSATION$0.43???
TOTAL $6.07??????
THIS WAS TAKEN OUT MONTHLY NOT YEARLY.

THE ACCOUNTANT IS AN EMPLOYEE OF
THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA AND
IT IS MY OPINION THAT THE FUNDS FOR
MANAGEMENT ETC WERE
STOLEN
AND PAID TO THE JUDGES AND LAWYERS
BELONGING TO
THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA.
THE ACCOUNTANT AND
THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA ARE A
CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION
AND I SHALL EXPECT
DENISE UNHULA AND
JUDGE SHEFFIED AND ALL THE OTHER JUDGES
AND LAWYERS TO BE CHARGED
WITH THEFT OF GOVERNMENT ASSETS AND
THEFT OF THE CHILDRENS RIGHT TO COUNSELING
EXCEPT THE CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY
NEVER PROVED ANY SEXUAL ASSAULT
BY THE MOTHER OR JACK HEPWORTH.

THE JUDGE AND THE CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY
STOLE
THE CHILDRENS
RIGHT TO THE
NATURAL LOVE AND AFFECTION
OF THERE MOTHER LORENA KERR.

THE CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY
STOLE
THE IDENTITY OF
RAYMOND/
TREVOR/
MACY
AS CHILDREN OF THEIR MOTHER LORENA KERR.
THE CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY IS A
CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION THAT NOW EVEN ALLOWS
PERVERTS
TO ADOPT CHILDREN TO BE
SEXUALLY ABUSED.

THE GOVERNMENT KEEPS THESE
CHRISTIAN
CHILDRENS AID SOCIETIES OPEN TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE
A STEADY SUP[PLY OF CHILDREN THAT THEY CAN SEXUALLY ABUSE.

CLOSE DOWN THESE PERVERT ORGANIZATIONS

7800 NATIVE CHILDREN HAVE BEEN
PROVEN
TO BE SEXUALLY ABUSED BY
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT/
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

CHILDRENS AID SOCIETIES ARE FINANCED
BY ONTARIO AND CHRISTIAN CHURCHES.
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO:192 HEADS OF NATIONS. LETTER NO;874 E-MAIL ON.

873 THEFT OF CANADIAN TAX MONEY TALK

2006-07-15T08:22:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK POLITHEFT JULY12,2006
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON TUES, WED, THURS
TEL (613) 235-0617
OTTAWA SEE: http://politheft.blogspot.com
FAX (613) 235-5573
ONTARIO K2P OY5
DEAR HEAD OF NATION

THEFT OF CANADIAN TAX MONEY TALK:

THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC IN CANADA
HAS WANTED TO BECOME A NATION SINCE
RENE LEVESQUE BECAME PREMIER OF ONTARIO.
QUEBEC HAS HELD THIS POSITION
OVER THE HEAD OF CANADA FOR YEARS.

BREAK UP WOULD MEAN THAT THE
UNITED STATES WOULD CANNIBALIZE CANADA
PROVINCE BY PROVINCE
UNTIL IT HAS ALL THE
MINERALS/OIL/WATER
WITHOUT PAYING FOR THEM.

QUEBEC ORDERED A REFERENDUM
TO LET THE QUEBEC PEOPLE CHOOSE

BEFORE THE REFERENDOM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF PARLIAMENT
BECAUSE THE 75 MEMBERS FROM QUEBEC
WOULD NOT CONSENT
TO SET UP A FUND OF BETWEEN
$250 MILLION & $1 BILLION
TO SPONSOR ATHLETIC EVENTS & COMMUNITY EVENTS
IN QUEBEC & ACROSS CANADA
TO GET ITS MESSAGE OUT.

VOTE FOR CANADA.

ADVERTISNG AGENCIES /
GOVERNMENT MINISTERS/
CIVIL SERVANTS
GOT ON THE BAND WAGON
& THEY ALL TOOK THIS
STOLEN UNAUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT MONEY
& STUFFED IT IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS
INCLUDING OFFSHORE BANK ACCOUNTS
KNOWINGLY.

THIEVES.

THE GOMERY COMMISSION TOOK ALL THE EVIDENCE OF THE
LIERS
WHO WERE PROTECTING
PRIME MINISTER JEAN CHRETIEN AND HIS CABINET
& THE ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE
WHO WERE PAID OFF $1.7 MILLION
TO PROTECT THE GOVERNMENT THIEVES.

IN MY QUEST TO PROTECT THE TREASURY OF CANADA
I MADE REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
UNDER THE ACCESS TO INFORMATION ACT
& OBTAINED 2 SETS OF 1000S OF PAGES ITEMIZING
THE MONEY THAT HAD BEEN STOLEN BY
ADVERTISING AGENCIES/
COMPANIES THAT HIRED THE THIEVES
TO STEAL THE MONEY.

PRIME MINISTER PAUL MARTIN SAID THAT
ALL DOCUMENTS HAD TO BE DISCLOSED
TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THE THEFT.
INCLUDING THE THEFT BY
THE PRIME MINISTERS AND CABINETS.

I MADE AN ACCESS TO INFORMATION REQUEST
WHICH WAS ACKNOWLEDGED ON APRIL 7,2006
IN THE LETTERS ON MY ABOVE BLOG.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SENT ME A BILL FOR
$2700.00+-
WHICH AS AN OLD AGE PENSIONER I COULD NOT PAY.
I CUT DOWN MY REQUEST & PAID $350,00+-
UP FRONT.
ON APRIL 11,2006 I RECIEVED A LETTER FROM
THE PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE SAYING
MY REQUEST WOULD BE SENT WITHIN 30+60 DAYS
MEANING BY JULY 11,2006.
TODAY IS JULY 12,2006 AND I HAVE RECIEVED
NOTHING YET.

FOR 4 YEARS+- THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
ACCESS TO INFORMATION HAS BEEN COVERING UP
EVIDENCE OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES OF
PRIME MINISTERS CHRETIEN AND
PRIME MINISTER MARTIN.

PRIME MINISTER MARTIN
STUFFED SPONSORSHIP MONEY INTO HIS
OFFSHORE ACCOUNTS
IN HIS CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES IN BARBADOS.

AS YOU KNOW OFFSHORE BANKS ARE BANKS THAT HAVE
ACCOUNTS WHERE THE ACCOUNT OWNERS PAY NO TAXES
TO HIS/HER NATION ON MONEY
STOLEN FROM INDIVIDUALS/
CORPORATIONS &
NATIONS
BY
HEADS OF NATIONS/
CORPORATIONS/I
NDIVIDUALS.

I SHALL EXPECT FULL DISCLOSURE
BY THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE OF
" ALL SECRET CABINET DOCUMENTS
WITH REFERENCE TO THE SPONSORSHIP SCANDAL
FROM 1994 TO 2004
SHOWING ALL THE MINISTERS INVOLVED
INCLUDING THE PRIME MINISTERS."

CANADIANS ARE TIRED OF BEING LIED TO
BY THE CIVIL SERVANTS
COVERING UP THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES OF
PRIME MINISTERS AND THEIR CABINETS.

THE TAX ACT OF CANADA FACILITATES THESE CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES.

I LOOK FORWARD TO OBTAINING ALL DOCUMENTS ON A WEB PAGE OF THE GOVERNMENT GIVING ALL THE CABINET DOCUMENTS SO CANADIANS CAN EXAMINE THEM + PREVIOUS 2000 PAGES+- INCLUDING THE POLICE FORCES OF CANADA AND PROSECUTORS.

$200 BILLION LAST YEAR IS UNACCOUNTED FOR AS THEIR ARE NO ACCOUNTANTS CERTIFICATES FOR THE $200 BILLION.
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO:192 HEADS OF NATIONS
LETTER NO:873 E-MAIL ON.

873 THEFT OF CANADIAN TAX MONEY TALK

2006-07-15T07:59:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS JULY 12,2005

750 VATICAN TALK PAGE 1-3 OF 51

2005-07-10T03:49:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS JULY 11-14,2005 203 GLADSTONE AVE, APT 46 OUT 014 MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235--0617 OTTAWA,COMMENT:http://thevoiceless.blogspot.com FAX(613)235-5573 ONTARIO K2P OY5 http://www.thabeatONTHESTREET.ottawa.on.ca

DEAR HEAD OF NATION SEE: http://pDlitheft.poliblog.com

VATICAN TALK: ON JULY 4,2005 THE FIRm OF LEDROIT BECKETT OF LONDON, ONTARIO, CANADA ISSUED CLAIM WO:47462 IN THE SUPERIOR COURt OF JUSTICE LONDON, ONTARIO AGAINST

THE HOLY SEE (STATE OF THE VATICAN) THE COLLEGE OF CARDINALS

OF THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

AS REPRESENTED BY ALOYSIUS MATTHEW CARDINAL AMBROZIC,

ALOYSIUS MATTHEW CARDINAL AMBROZIC,

BISHOP EUGENE LAROCQUE AMONG OTHERS

ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF ADRIEN DONAT ST LOUIS FOR $3,100,000.00 FOR SEXUAL ASSAULTS THAT THE DEFENDANTS NEGLIGENTLY FAILED TO PROTECT THE PLAINTIFF FROM AND OR PARTICIPATED IN. IT IS ALLEGED THAT BISHOP EUGENE LAROCQUE WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN FORMING A PEDOPHILE PERVERT CLAN BASED IN CORNWALL ONTARIO SOME OF WHOSE PARTICIPANTS WERE (A) FATHER CHARLES MACDONALD (B) KEN SEGUIN (C)NELSON BARQUE (D) RICHARD HICKERSON (E) MONSIGNOR R.J. MACDONALD (F) FATHER JOHN MCPHAIL (G) FATHER JOHN DONIHEE (H) MALCOM MACDONALD (J) DR. ARTHUR PEACHY (K) BRIAN DiUFJR.

THE CLAIM ALLEGES THE HOLY SEE AND THE COLLEGE OF CARDINALS REPRESENT THE GOVERNANCE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH THROUGH THE "CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH" ETC ( COMMENT:THIS IN FACT IS THE "INQUISITION" THAT IS STILL IN PLACE SINCE 1400+-.AND WHICH THE POPE BENEDICT IS THE HEAD OF AS WELL AS BEING POPE. THIS ORGANIZATION TORTURED AND IMPRISONED INDIVIDUALS WHO THEY SAID WERE WITCHES. THIS ORGANIZATION WAS THE POWER BEHIND THE CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION KNOWN AS THE VATICAN.) THE VATICAN PUBLISHED 'THE INSTRUCTION ENTITLED " ON THE MANNER OF PROCEEDING IN CASES OF SOLICITATION" IN 1962 WHICH IS DESIGNED TO COVER UP THE EXISTENCE OF SEXUAL ASSAULTS AND CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND POPE BENEDICT AS 'THE POPE & HEAD OF

"THE CONGREGATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH"

WOULD AS HEAD INQUISITOR REQUIRE THE HIGHEST AMOUNT OF SECRECY IN SUCH MATTERS-UNDER PAIN OF EXCOMMUNICATION. THE PERVERT EMPIRE HAD THE PROTECTION OF THE INQUISITION THAT IS COMPARABLE TO

THE MAFIA OF WHICH IT HAS MANY MEMBERS.

PLEASE SEE http://politheft.blogspot.com FOR THE FULL 50 PAGES OF THE CLAIM. IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST MEMBERS OF THIS RELIGIOUS CULT SHOULD 3E QUESTIONED BY NATIONAL AUTHORITIES IN ORDER TO PROTECT YOUR CITIZENS. IT IS YOUR DUTY EVEN THOUGH THIS CLAIM HAS NOT BEEN HEARD AS YET. THERE IS ALSO A FULL INQUIRY TO TAKE PLACE IN CORNWALL IN REFERENCE TO THIS GROUP OF ALLEGED HOMOSEXUAL CULT MEMBERS. THIS POPE & PREVIOUS POPES HAVE RELIED ON "ON THE MANNER OF PROCEEDING IN CASES OF SOLICITATION" TO COVER UP THESE CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTIVITIES.

CANADA AS A SAME SEX NATION MAY HAVE CATHOLIC HOMOSEXUALS AS JUDGES TO HEAR THIS CASE. EACH YEAR AT THE OPENING OF THE FALL ASSIZES THE JUDGES ATTEND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TO OPEN THE ASSIZES. I SHALL EXPECT A NON CATHOLIC STRAIGHT JUDGE TO HEAR THIS CASE PROVED BY A LIE DETECTOR TEST.

PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO: 192 HEADS OF NATIONS. LETTER NO: 750 E-MAIL ON.

Court file no. 47462

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

ADRIEN DONAT ST. LOUIS

Plaintiff

and

THE HOLY SEE (STATE OF THE VATICAN CITY),

THE COLLEGE OF CARDINALS OF THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, as Represented by ALOYSIUS 'MATTHEW CARDINAL AMBROZIC,

ALOYSIUS MATTHEW CARDINAL AMBROZIC, THE ROMAN CATHOLIC EPISCOPAL CORPORATION OF THE DIOCESE OF LONDON, THE ROMAN CATHOLIC EPISCOPAL CORPORATION OF THE DIOCESE OF ALEXANDRIA-CORNWALL, BISHOP EUGENE LAROCQUE, and The Estate of DONALD SCOTT by his Litigation Administrator, Gordon Cudmore,

Defendants

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

TO THE DEFENDANTS:

A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the Plaintiff. The claim made against you is set out in the following pages.

IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, you or an Ontario lawyer acting for you must prepare a Statement of Defence in Form 18A prescribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure, serve it on the Plaintiffs lawyer or, where the Plaintiff does not have a lawyer, serve it on the Plaintiff, and file it, with proof of service, in this court office, WITHIN TWENTY DAYS after this statement of claims is served on you, if you are served in Ontario.

If you are served in another province or territory of Canada or in the

United States of America, the period for service and filing your Statement of Defence is forty days. If you are served outside Canada and the United States of . America, the period is sixty days.

Instead of serving and filing a statement of defence, you may serve and file a notice of intent to defend in Form 18B prescribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure. This will entitle you to ten more days within which to serve and file your statement of defence.

IF YOU FAIL TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, JUDGMENT MAY BE GIVEN AGAINST YOU IN YOUR ABSENCE AND WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING BUT ARE UNABLE TO PAY LEGAL FEES, LEGAL AID MAY BE AVAILABLE TO YOU BY CONTACTING A LOCAL LEGAL AID OFFICE.

Issued by

Registrar, Superior Court of Justice Civil

Ground Floor, Unit "A" COURT HOUSE

80 Dundas Street, LONDON, Ontario, N6A 6A3

TO: The Holy See (State of the Vatican City) c/o Apostolic Nunciature

724 Manor Avenue Ottawa, ON

KlM OE3

TO: The College of Cardinals of the Holy Roman Catholic Church as represented by Cardinal Aloysius Matthew Ambrozic 1155 Yonge Street,

Toronto, Ontario M4T 1W2

TO:Cardinal Aloysius Matthew Ambrozic

1155 Yonge Street,

Toronto, Ontario

750 VATICAN TALK PAGES 3 TO 51

2005-07-10T03:39:00.000-07:00

TO: The Roman Catholic Episcopal

Corporation of The Diocese of

London in Ontario

1070 Waterloo Street

London, Ontario

N6A 3Y2

TO: The Roman Catholic Episcopal

Corporation of The Diocese of

Alexandria-Cornwall

Box 1338, 220 Montreal Road,

Cornwall, Ontario

K6H 5V4

TO: Bishop Eugene LaRocque

Paroisse St-Joseph (Rivere-Canard)

939 Townline Road

Windsor, Ontario

N9J 2W6

AND TO: The Estate of Donald Scott

by his Litigation Administrator,

Gordon Cudmore

100 Fullarton Street,

London, Ontario

N6A 1K1

CLAIM

1. The plaintiff claims damages as follows:

(a) non-pecuniary damages for pain and suffering in the amount of $1,000,000.00;

(b) past and future pecuniary damages estimated in the amount of $1,000,000.00;

(d) special damages in the amount of $100,000.00.

2. In addition, the plaintiff claims:

(a) pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the above-noted amounts pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, as amended;

(b) costs of this action on a substantial indemnity basis;

(c) an Order that Aloysius Matthew Cardinal Ambrozic defend this action on behalf of himself and as a representative defendant of the defendant class, the College of Cardinals of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, pursuant to Rule 12.07 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg 194; and

(d) such further and other relief as to this Honourable Court may deem to be just.

Parties:

3. The plaintiff, Adrien Donat St. Louis (the “Plaintiff”), was born on October 19, 1956 and resides near the town of Apple Hill, in the Province of Ontario.

4. The Plaintiff was at all material times, a member of the Roman Catholic Church through the Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of The Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall ("Alexandria-Cornwall"). Specifically he was a member of Saint James parish (the "Church") located in Maxville, Ontario.

5. The Holy See (State of the Vatican City) (the "Holy See") is a religious body which has been extended the status of sovereign state and is located in Rome, Italy. The Holy See operates as one of the central authorities of the Roman Catholic Church and is the legal international entity which controls and holds the financial, real property and other assets of the worldwide Roman Catholic Church, outside of that which is held by Dioceses around the world. The Roman Catholic Church is an unincorporated association which constitutes a Christian religion which has extensive membership worldwide. The Holy See operates the Vatican Bank to assist them in their financial tasks.

6. The College of Cardinals of the Holy Roman Catholic Church (the "College") is an unincorporated worldwide association of the senior most ranking members of the Roman Catholic Church which constitute the ecclesiastical governance of the Roman Catholic Church. The College is a defendant class of which there are approximately 181 members. The College's representative for purposes of this action is Aloysius Matthew Cardinal Ambrozic ("Ambrozic"). The College has funds held in trust for it by the Holy See and the Vatican Bank.

7. Aloysius Matthew Cardinal Ambrozic ("Ambrozic") is an individual who resides in the municipality of Toronto. Ambrozic is the Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Toronto and is a member of the College having been so appointed on February 21, 1998. As a member of the College he continues a line of succession of Cardinals which stretch back centuries. As a Cardinal he acts in both an advisory and governance capacity with regard to the worldwide operations of the Roman Catholic Church. Ambrozic shares a common interest with the rest of the College.

8. The defendant, The Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of London ("London") is an incorporated body in the Province of Ontario charged with carrying out the activities of the Roman Catholic Church within its geographical region. London selected, trained and ordained the defendant LaRocque to the priesthood as well as screened, submitted and recommended his appointment to Bishop.

9. The defendant, The Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall ("Alexandria-Cornwall") is an incorporated body in the Province of Ontario charged with carrying out the activities of the Roman Catholic Church within its geographical region. Alexandria-Cornwall screened and selected the defendant Scott and provided him with religious rights and faculties within their Diocese. As Bishop the defendant LaRocque was the corporation sole of Alexandria-Cornwall.

10. The defendant, Bishop Eugene LaRocque (“LaRocque”), is an individual who resides in the Municipality of Windsor, in the Province of Ontario and was, at all material times, a priest and later a Bishop of the Roman Catholic Church. As a priest he was employed by London and as a Bishop he was controlled by either the collective or individual direction of the defendant Holy See and/or the College and swore allegiance to them. LaRocque was ordained by the Holy See and/or the College to Bishop of Alexandria-Cornwall on September 15, 1974 and held such a position when he inflicted the sexual abuse upon the Plaintiff.

11. The defendant, The Estate of Donald Scott (the "Estate") by his Litigation Administrator Gordon Cudmore is the legal representative of Donald Scott (“Scott”), who is deceased and was, at all material times, a priest of the Roman Catholic Church and was employed by the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall. For the majority of the material time, Scott was also a parish priest at the Church. The Estate is responsible in law for the former actions of Scott.

12. The Holy See, the College, Ambrozic, London and Alexandria-Cornwall had a duty of care to Roman Catholics such as the Plaintiff. This duty of care was based upon the close proximity of the defendants' religious activities, especially the activities of its priests and Bishops, to the lives of Roman Catholics such as the Plaintiff. Furthermore this duty of care was amplified by the extreme level of trust and faith which Roman Catholics such as the Plaintiff and others extended to these defendants and their clergy. Scott and LaRocque also owed a duty of care to the Plaintiff based upon the Priest/parishioner and Bishop/parishioner relationship which existed between them.

The Actions of the Holy See, the College and Ambrozic

13. The Holy See and the College jointly and/or in collaboration with each other represent the governance of the Roman Catholic Church. Their governance includes but is not limited to the following:

(a) appointing, supervising and disciplining Bishops through the Congregation for Bishops and other bodies;

(b) interpreting, defining and enforcing the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church upon the Bishops and their Diocese through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and other bodies;

(c) controlling and disciplining the clergy of the Roman Catholic Church through the enforcement of their own internal law know as the Code of Canon Law; and

(d) the drafting, authoring, publishing and transmission of directives and policies on the internal governance of the Roman Catholic Church; and

(e) electing the Pope and advising him on the above activities or actually carrying out said activities with delegated authority.

14. The members of the College, such as Ambrozic run the operations of the Roman Catholic Church, through the numerous congregations, committees and other governing entities which they staff. The principle of succession is in effect amongst the College and its members whereby Cardinals enforce and carry on the activities of their predecessors thereby inheriting any liabilities which the College or its members may have incurred. Ambrozic and the present membership of the College are therefore liable for their own actions within the College as well as those of their predecessors.

15. The Holy See and the College interpreted and enforced the following general teachings of the Roman Catholic Church during the material time:

(a) that the Roman Catholic Church is the one true religion and is the representation of God’s true teachings on earth;

(b) that the authority of the Roman Catholic Church is supreme;

(c) that by following the rules, principles and ideologies of the Roman Catholic Church one will gain the right to go to Heaven and that by failing to follow the same one will not go to Heaven and will go to Hell;

(d) that parents must bring their children up in the ways of the Roman Catholic Church and that children must attend at Catholic schools so that they can be educated with respect to the ways of the church;

(e) that you must go to church at least once a week and attend Catholic schools where the rules, principles and ideologies of the Roman Catholic Church and religion are taught;

(f) that the rule of God is supreme and that to disobey the rule of God is a mortal sin which will cause one to go to Hell;

(g) that God’s representation on earth and the teachings of God are done through priests;

(h) that priests and clergy are the chosen representatives on earth of God and have special powers; and

(i) that priests and clergy are to be viewed with special reverence, power, respect, honour and authority.

16. The Holy See and the College specifically through their Congregation for Bishops, which they staff and direct, and other bodies were responsible for the task of screening, appointing, controlling, supervising and disciplining the activities of Bishops such as LaRocque, which constitute a relationship akin to that of employment and they are thereby vicariously liable for the actions of LaRocque in so far as they are linked or empowered by his status as a Bishop.

17. The Holy See and the College appointed and employed LaRocque to carry out the religious purposes and teachings referred to above in dealing with Alexandria-Cornwall and its parishioners. They provided LaRocque with the opportunity and means to come into contact with the Plaintiff. They fostered a relationship between LaRocque and the Plaintiff. They provided LaRocque with a position of respect and trust which the Plaintiff was bound by the rules set out above to follow and honour.

18. The Plaintiff pleads that, at all material times, the defendant LaRocque, was acting in the course of his duties within the Roman Catholic Church and Alexandria-Cornwall and was using the aforementioned rules, principles and ideologies to further his attempts to manipulate the Plaintiff and engage in deviant activities.

19. The Plaintiff pleads that the aforementioned rules, principles and ideologies of the Roman Catholic Church, as pronounced by the Holy See and the College, created an opportunity for the defendant LaRocque, to exert power and authority over the Plaintiff. This power and authority allowed the defendant LaRocque, to engage in the aforementioned behaviour and to continue to engage in same without resistance or question of the Plaintiff for considerable time without risk of being exposed and thereby put the Plaintiff at risk of being abused by LaRocque.

20. The Plaintiff pleads that the defendant LaRocque, was, as a result of his position as Bishop, allowed to use the premises owned by Alexandria-Cornwall where the aforementioned behaviours and activities occurred and to gain access to the Plaintiff affording him an opportunity to foster a trusting relationship with the Plaintiff and engage in the aforementioned behaviours for many years without the risk of being exposed, caught and thereby put the Plaintiff at risk of being abused by LaRocque.

21. As a result, the defendants the Holy See and the College are vicariously responsible and liable for the actions of LaRocque.

22. The Holy See and the College either collectively and/or individually were negligent in their governance of the Roman Catholic Church and failed in their duty to the Plaintiff as follows:

Appointment and Supervision

(a) they failed to effectively interview, screen, and scrutinize LaRocque prior to his appointment to Bishop;

(b) they failed to follow their own internal policies in ordaining LaRocque to Bishop and/or allowing him to work within the Roman Catholic Church and Alexandria-Cornwall, namely then Canons 330 and 331 of their Code of Canon Law;

(c) they failed to effectively supervise LaRocque in his conduct as a Bishop with regard to the level of power they afforded him;

(d) they failed to provide him adequate guidance as a Bishop through the mechanism of the visit ad limina and other processes of training and guidance for Bishops;

(e) they failed to verify the information provided by LaRocque on his quinquennial report and other reports regarding himself and the status of Alexandria-Cornwall;

(f) they failed to convey and include LaRocque in an adequate number of Synods of Bishops to ensure his rightful conduct as a Bishop;

(g) they have failed to this day to react to indicia of difficulties which LaRocque or Alexandria-Cornwall exhibited;

(h) they failed to warn members of the Roman Catholic Church and others who may come into contact with LaRocque of his prior difficulties as both a seminarian and a priest;

(i) they failed to protect the Plaintiff from LaRocque when they knew or ought to have known that he was vulnerable to the attentions and influence of LaRocque;

(j) they failed to screen and/or monitor the character, sexual orientation and sexual activity of the defendant LaRocque;

(k) they failed to warn the Plaintiff and others of the propensities of LaRocque;

(l) they failed to remove LaRocque from his duties upon learning of the allegations of sexual and inappropriate conduct thereby leaving the Plaintiff exposed to LaRocque, and his actions without protection as well as those actions of clergy under LaRocque's deficient supervision;

(m) they failed to protect the Plaintiff;

(n) they failed to take steps to investigate the activities of LaRocque once they knew or ought to have known of his problems in an effort to locate and assist any victims; and

(o) they failed to identify/counsel and assist the Plaintiff once they knew of these behaviours.

Doctrine and Teachings

(p) they failed to recognize that a certain percentage of the priests would become sexually deviant and would make sexual advances to young children;

(q) they failed to mandate that priests in training and ordained priests and other clergy be instructed about the possibilities of becoming sexually deviant and/or making advances to children;

(r) they failed to have a central system of reporting and documenting the shortcomings and related discipline of their clergy;

(s) they failed to educate members of the Roman Catholic Church about the possibilities of such deviant behaviours;

(t) they failed to have any, or a proper, system of self- reporting, other-reporting or counselling in place for priests who engage in such behaviour;

(u) they failed to mandate a regime of disciplinary action and internal and external prosecution of sexually deviant priests and actually ensure such a system was being carried out;

(v) they failed to mandate dismissal of priests and other clergy found to have engaged in sexual deviance and chose instead to implement, encourage or acquiesce to a policy of transfer and deception;

(w) they fostered a system, based on the rules, principles and ideologies of the church, in which deviant sexual practices were bound to develop among a percentage of the priests;

(x) they fostered a system, based on the rules, principles and ideologies of the church, in particular, the rule that priests have absolute authority, whereby the reporting of such deviant sexual behaviour of a priest by its members would be considered to be “wrong”;

(y) they denied the existence, or alternatively were wilfully blind to the existence of the behaviours described herein;

(z) they implemented and maintained a system which was designed to cover-up the existence of such behaviour, if such behaviour was ever reported, namely the 1962 Instruction entitled On the Manner of Proceeding in Cases of Solicitation (Instructico De Modo Procedendi In Causis Sollicitationis) which imposes the highest level of secrecy upon such matters;

(aa) they have failed to follow or require Diocese to follow their own internal judicial procedures for dealing with sexually deviant priests and clergy as defined within the Code of Canon Law;

(bb) they have failed to impose in a timely fashion any effective protocols and remedies to address the global and longstanding epidemic of clergy sex abuse;

(cc) they have failed to discipline or publically denounce Bishops and others who ignore or propagate the clergy sex abuse problem and have actually promoted such men to even greater positions of authority within their ranks;

(dd) both historically and currently have suppressed information or disclosure concerning the problem of clergy sex abuse in an attempt to avoid scandal rather than brining awareness and resolution to the issue; and

(ee) they have ignored, tolerated, disregarded, permitted, and condoned, both through inaction and action, the sexual abuse of young people by their clergy.

23. In addition to, and in the alternative to the above, the Plaintiff pleads that the defendants Holy See and the College knew that the defendant, LaRocque, had the propensity to engage in such deviant behaviours and was, in fact, engaging in such deviant behaviour because of the following:

(a) LaRocque's difficulties as a seminarian;

(b) LaRocque's difficulties with sexuality;

(d) The frequency with which the Plaintiff and other children were involved with LaRocque;

(e) The unusual interest that LaRocque took in young males;

(f) the frequency with which the Plaintiff and other young males were at the churches, rectories and schools where LaRocque worked and resided;

(g) the frequency of activities and outings in which LaRocque would be alone with young males;

(h) the duration of time and the number of years in which the Plaintiff and other young males spent regular time alone with LaRocque;

(i) the attendances of LaRocque and a number of his clergy at social functions at Pilon Point, Ontario; Cameron's Point, Ontario; Birch Avenue, Fort Lauderdale Florida; Saltaire Motel, Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Lot 17 Concession 1, RR# 1 Cornwall, Ontario; Stanley Island, Ontario; St. Andrew's Parish house, Cornwall, Ontario and other locations where young males as the guests of adult men would consume drugs and alcohol and engage in sexual activities with each other; and

(j) the fact that the defendant LaRocque, would have, in accordance with the rules of the Roman Catholic Church, confessed about these deviant sexual behaviours (i.e. sins) from time to time to one or more of the other priests.

24. Despite their knowledge of same, the defendants the Holy See and the College took no steps to stop the behaviour, report such or ultimately to protect the Plaintiff.

25. In the alternative, if the defendants the Holy See and the College, did not have direct knowledge of the aforementioned behaviours the Plaintiff pleads that these defendants ought to have known about same because of the circumstances, as detailed above, surrounding the acts.

26. If the defendants the Holy See and the College did not know of the aforementioned behaviour, it was because of the existence of its own rules, principles and ideologies which allowed the defendant LaRocque to conceal his activities and cover up his deviant behaviour.

27. The Plaintiff says that the defendants the Holy See, the College and Ambrozic, for the aforementioned reasons failed in their duty of care to the Plaintiff and were thereby negligent.

Sovereign Immunity

28. The Plaintiff pleads that the Holy See or any of its agents or employees cannot rely upon the doctrine of sovereign immunity as the Holy See is not a "foreign state" within the meaning of that term as it applies to the doctrine of sovereign immunity within customary international law and the common law and statutory law of Canada.

29. In the alternative, if the Holy See is a "foreign state" for the purposes of sovereign immunity the Plaintiff pleads that no immunity affixes for the following reasons:

(a) the actions upon which the Holy See's liability rests are not actions of a sovereign state for which immunity would affix;

(b) the Holy See has implicitly or explicitly waived any rights under or is estopped from raising sovereign immunity as a defence by, amongst other things failing to raise such defence over a period of decades;

(c) the doctrine of sovereign immunity was not intended to shelter activities which constitute a violation of international human rights and/or criminal activity; and

(d) the Plaintiff relies upon the State Immunity Act, R.S.C. 1990, c.S-18 and the fact that the herein action is for personal physical injury to the Plaintiff which occurred in Canada with its resultant emotional and psychological effects for which there is no sovereign immunity.

30. For purposes of the State Immunity Act the cause of action in this matter arose no earlier then July 15, 1982 via the concepts of discoverability and continuing cause of action. In the alternative the State Immunity Act being procedural in essence and conveying a benefit upon states applies retroactively.

31. In the further alternative, to impose sovereign immunity through the State Immunity Act or other governmental act in this matter would constitute a violation of the Plaintiff's rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the "Charter"), as follows:

(a) the Plaintiff's right to life, liberty and security of person and the right not to deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice, pursuant to section 7 of the Charter would be violated; and

(b) the Plaintiff's equality rights, pursuant to section 15 of the Charter would be violated on the basis of discrimination based upon religion in that as a Roman Catholic, the Plaintiff is restricted from seeking legal recourse against the central authority of his religion.

The Actions of London

32. The defendant London selected trained and ordained the defendant LaRocque to the priesthood. They provided him religious rights and faculties within London and ultimately appointed him to prestigious positions within London. LaRocque was at all times prior to his ordination to Bishop incardinated to London and thereby the responsibility of London.

33. The Plaintiff pleads that the defendant, London, was negligent and failed in their duty to the Plaintiff, the particulars of which are set out below:

(a) they failed to recognize that a certain percentage of the priests would become sexually deviant and would make sexual advances to young children;

(b) they failed to instruct priests in training and ordained priests about the possibilities of becoming sexually deviant and/or making advances to children;

(c) they failed to properly investigate LaRocque's background, character and psychological state prior to allowing him to become a seminarian and later a priest;

(d) they failed to document, discipline, or expel LaRocque for his shortcomings as a seminarian;

(e) they failed to follow their own internal policies in ordaining LaRocque to the priesthood and/or allowing him to work within London;

(f) they failed to warn LaRocque's immediate supervisors, parishioners and others who may come into contact with LaRocque of his prior difficulties as both a seminarian and a priest;

(g) they were deficient in their screening of LaRocque's candidacy for Bishop, knowing full well the reliance which other parties would place upon their reference and recommendation for such a prestigious and powerful post;

(h) they recommended LaRocque for Bishop when they knew or ought to have known that he was not capable or competent for such a post;

(i) they failed to educate members of the Roman Catholic Church about the possibilities of such deviant behaviours;

(j) they failed to have any, or a proper, system of self-reporting, other-reporting or counselling in place for priests who engage in such behaviour;

(k) they fostered a system, based on the rules, principles and ideologies of the church, in which deviant sexual practices were bound to develop among a percentage of the priests;

(l) they fostered a system, based on the rules, principles and ideologies of the church, in particular, the rule that priests have absolute authority, whereby the reporting of such deviant sexual behaviour of a priest by its members would be considered to be “wrong”;

(m) they denied the existence, or alternatively were wilfully blind to the existence of the behaviours described herein;

(n) they implemented and maintained a system which was designed to cover-up the existence of such behaviour, if such behaviour was ever reported;

(o) they failed to protect the Plaintiff from LaRocque when they knew or ought to have known that he was vulnerable to the attentions and influence of LaRocque;

(p) they failed to properly supervise, control and give guidance to their then employee, LaRocque;

(q) they failed to screen and/or monitor the character, sexual orientation and sexual activity of the defendant LaRocque;

(r) they failed to warn the Plaintiff and others of the propensities of LaRocque;

(s) they failed to remove LaRocque from his duties upon learning of the allegations of sexual and inappropriate conduct thereby leaving the Plaintiff and others exposed to LaRocque and his actions without protection;

(t) they failed to protect the Plaintiff;

(u) they failed to take steps to investigate the activities of LaRocque once they knew or ought to have known of his problems in an effort to locate and assist any victims; and

(v) they failed to identify/counsel and assist the Plaintiff once they knew of these behaviours.

34. In addition to, and in the alternative to the above, the Plaintiff pleads that the defendant London knew that the defendant, LaRocque, had the propensity to engage in such deviant behaviours and was, in fact, engaging in such deviant behaviour because of the following:

(a) LaRocque's difficulties as a seminarian;

(b) LaRocque's difficulties with sexuality;

(d) The frequency with which the Plaintiff and other children were involved with LaRocque;

(e) The unusual interest that LaRocque took in young males;

(f) the frequency with which the Plaintiff and other young males were at the churches, rectories and schools where LaRocque worked and resided;

(g) the frequency of activities and outings in which LaRocque would be alone with young male;

(h) the duration of time and the number of years in which the Plaintiff and other young males spent regular time alone with LaRocque; and

(i) the fact that the defendant LaRocque, would have, in accordance with the rules of the Roman Catholic Church, confessed about these deviant sexual behaviours (i.e. sins) from time to time to one or more of the other priests.

35. Despite their knowledge of same, the defendant London, took no steps to stop the behaviour, report such or ultimately to protect the Plaintiff.

36. In the alternative, if the defendant London, did not have direct knowledge of the aforementioned behaviours the Plaintiff pleads that the defendant London ought to have known about same because of the circumstances, as detailed above, surrounding the acts.

37. If the defendant London, did not know of the aforementioned behaviour, it was because of the existence of its own rules, principles and ideologies which allowed the defendant LaRocque to conceal his activities and cover up his deviant behaviour.

38. The Plaintiff says that the defendant London, for the aforementioned reasons failed in their duty of care to him and was thereby negligent.

The Actions of Alexandria-Cornwall

39. The defendant Alexandria-Cornwall employed Scott to carry out the religious purposes and teachings referred to above in dealing with the Plaintiff. They provided Scott with the opportunity and means to come into contact with the Plaintiff. They fostered a relationship between Scott and the Plaintiff. They provided Scott with a position of respect and trust which the Plaintiff was bound by the rules set out above to follow and honour. They provided Scott with a residence at various rectories which further added to his position of power and respect.

40. The Plaintiff pleads that, at all material times, the defendant Scott was acting in the course of his duties within the Roman Catholic Church and Alexandria-Cornwall and was using the aforementioned rules, principles and ideologies to further his attempts to manipulate the Plaintiff and engage in deviant activities.

41. The Plaintiff pleads that the aforementioned rules, principles and ideologies of the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall created an opportunity for the defendant Scott, to exert power and authority over the Plaintiff. This power and authority allowed the defendant, Scott, to engage in the aforementioned behaviour and to continue to engage in same without resistance or question of the Plaintiff for many years without risk of getting caught and thereby put the Plaintiff at risk of being abused by Scott.

42. The Plaintiff pleads that the defendant Scott was, as a result of his positions with the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall, allowed to use the premises owned by Alexandria-Cornwal where the aforementioned behaviours and activities occurred and to gain access to the Plaintiff affording him an opportunity to foster a trusting relationship with the Plaintiff and engage in the aforementioned behaviours for many years without the risk of getting caught and thereby put the Plaintiff at risk of being abused by Scott.

43. As a result, the defendant, Alexandria-Cornwall, is vicariously responsible and liable for the actions of Scott. The abovementioned opportunities and empowerment also apply to LaRocque and with him being the Corporation Sole of Alexandria-Cornwall, that defendant Diocese is also vicariously liable for his actions.

44. The Plaintiff pleads that the defendant, Alexandria-Cornwall, was negligent and failed in their duty to the Plaintiff, the particulars of which are set out below:

(a) they failed to recognize that a certain percentage of the priests would become sexually deviant and would make sexual advances to young children;

(b) they failed to instruct priests in training and ordained priests about the possibilities of becoming sexually deviant and/or making advances to children;

(c) they failed to properly investigate Scott's background, character and psychological state prior to allowing him to become a priest of the Diocese;

(d) they failed to follow their own internal policies in ordaining Scott to the priesthood and/or allowing him to work within the Diocese;

(e) they failed to warn Scott's immediate supervisors, parishioners and others who may come into contact with Scott of his prior difficulties both as a seminarian and as a priest;

(f) they failed to educate members of the Roman Catholic Church about the possibilities of such deviant behaviours;

(g) they failed to have any, or a proper, system of self- reporting, other-reporting or counselling in place for priests who engage in such behaviour;

(h) they fostered a system, based on the rules, principles and ideologies of the church, in which deviant sexual practices were bound to develop among a percentage of the priests;

(i) they fostered a system, based on the rules, principles and ideologies of the church, in particular, the rule that priests have absolute authority, whereby the reporting of such deviant sexual behaviour of a priest by its members would be considered to be “wrong”;

(j) they denied the existence, or alternatively were wilfully blind to the existence of the behaviours described herein;

(k) they implemented and maintained a system which was designed to cover-up the existence of such behaviour, if such behaviour was ever reported;

(l) they failed to protect the Plaintiff from Scott when they knew or ought to have known that he was vulnerable to the attentions and influence of Scott;

(m) they failed to properly supervise, control and give guidance to their employee Scott;

(n) they failed to screen and/or monitor the character, sexual orientation and sexual activity of the defendant Scott;

(o) they failed to warn the Plaintiff and others of the propensities of Scott;

(p) they failed to remove Scott from his duties upon learning of the allegations of sexual and inappropriate conduct thereby leaving the Plaintiff exposed to Scott and his actions without protection;

(q) they failed to protect the Plaintiff;

(r) they failed to take steps to investigate the activities of Scott once they knew or ought to have known of his problems in an effort to locate and assist any victims; and

(s) they failed to identify/counsel and assist the Plaintiff once they knew of these behaviours.

45. In addition to, and in the alternative to, the above, the Plaintiff pleads that the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall knew that the defendant, Scott had the propensity to engage in such deviant behaviours and that he was, in fact, engaging in such deviant behaviour because of the following:

(a) Scott's difficulties as a seminarian;

(b) Scott's difficulties with sexuality;

(d) The frequency with which the Plaintiff and other children were involved with Scott;

(e) The unusual interest that Scott took in young males, particularly the Plaintiff;

(f) the frequency with which the Plaintiff and other young males were at the churches and rectories where Scott worked and resided;

(g) the frequency of activities and outings in which Scott would be alone with young males;

(h) the duration of time and the number of years in which the Plaintiff and other young males spent regular time alone with Scott; and

(i) the fact that the defendants, Scott would have, in accordance with the rules of the Roman Catholic Church, confessed about these deviant sexual behaviours (i.e. sins) from time to time to one or more of the other priests.

46. Despite their knowledge of same, the defendant, Alexandria-Cornwall, took no steps to stop the behaviour or to protect the Plaintiff.

47. In the alternative, if the defendant, Alexandria-Cornwall, did not have direct knowledge of the aforementioned behaviours the Plaintiff pleads that the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall ought to have known about same because of the circumstances, as detailed above, surrounding the acts.

48. If the defendant, Alexandria-Cornwall, did not know of the aforementioned behaviour, it was because of the existence of its own rules, principles and ideologies which allowed the defendant Scott to conceal his activities and cover up their deviant behaviour.

49. The Plaintiff pleads that the defendant, Alexandria-Cornwall, owed a special duty to the Plaintiff by virtue of its relationship with him to identify, counsel and render assistance to the Plaintiff once they became aware of the behaviours of the defendant Scott.

50. The defendant, Alexandria-Cornwall, knew or ought to have known that the Plaintiff was in need of counselling, assistance and support because of the actions of the defendants, Scott and that such assistance would be necessary in order to minimize the consequences of Scott's actions and the effect of the same on the Plaintiff. They have failed to this day to investigate the extent and severity of the abuse and have failed to render any assistance to the Plaintiff.

51. The Plaintiff states that the relationship between him and the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall and Scott commenced when the Plaintiff was a young person, as such, the defendants owed to the Plaintiff a high duty/standard of care and, in particular, a duty to protect him from harm by its employees (i.e. clergy) and specifically sexual abuse.

52. The Plaintiff says that the defendant, Alexandria-Cornwall, for the aforementioned reasons failed in their duty of care to him and was thereby negligent.

The Actions of LaRocque:

53. Following ordination, selection and training, London granted LaRocque the necessary spiritual rights and faculties to act as a priest within London. In 1974, the College and/or the Holy See, through the Congregation for Bishops approved, appointed, ordained and installed LaRocque as Bishop of Alexandria-Cornwall, a post he held until his retirement on April 27, 2002. He presently holds the post of Bishop Emeritus of Alexandria-Cornwall.

54. The Plaintiff became aware of LaRocque through his involvement with the Church of which he was a member. The Plaintiff personally met LaRocque at a parish rectory where LaRocque would stay temporarily during parish visits.

55. Through his position as a Bishop and representative of Alexandria-Cornwall and an employee of the Holy See and/or the College, LaRocque befriended himself to the Plaintiff.

56. LaRocque engaged in activities with the Plaintiff in his capacity as a Bishop, counselling him in religion, Catholic education and other matters.

57. Through his position as Bishop and representative of the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall and employee of the Holy See and/or the College, LaRocque was an important ecclesiastical authority to the Plaintiff. The young Plaintiff viewed LaRocque as a powerful, righteous and godly figure.

58. LaRocque used his position as a Bishop of the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall, and employee of the Holy See and/or the College which was a position of authority and trust, to develop a close personal relationship with the Plaintiff when he was young. The relationships that LaRocque developed with the Plaintiff, under the guise of a friendship based on a bishop-parishioner relationship, allowed LaRocque an opportunity to be alone with the Plaintiff and to exert total control over him, prey upon him and sexually abuse him.

59. In or about 1975 when the Plaintiff was approximately 18 years of age, LaRocque repeatedly sexually abused, assaulted and molested the Plaintiff, exposed him to prurient sexual behaviour, encouraged him to engage in deviant and prurient sexual behaviour and taught him how to be rewarded for doing so. The particulars of same are as follows:

(a) exposing his naked body to the Plaintiff;

(b) fondling the naked body of the Plaintiff, including but not limited to his penis, scrotum and buttocks;

(d) masturbating the Plaintiff;

(e) masturbating himself in the presence of the Plaintiff;

(f) ejaculating on the Plaintiff;

(g) engaging in other sexual activities with the Plaintiff;

(h) in order to facilitate the abuses LaRocque engaged in a pattern of behaviour which was intended to make the Plaintiff feel that he was special in the eyes of LaRocque, the Church and God; and

(i) in order to facilitate the abuses LaRocque also engaged in a pattern of behaviour which was intended to make the Plaintiff feel that his soul was in jeopardy.

60. The abovementioned activity occurred after the Plaintiff reached the age of consent, and the Plaintiff pleads that no consent was possible owing to the power dependency relationship between the Plaintiff and LaRocque.

61. The aforementioned behaviours occurred on premises, which were owned or controlled by the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall, the Holy See and/or the College, specifically at a parish rectory while the Bishop was visiting that parish.

62. The aforementioned behaviour occurred on a repeated basis. As time progressed, abuse intensified in both frequency and nature. All of the aforementioned behaviours were related to Bishop/parishioner activities.

63. Throughout the period of time that the aforementioned behaviour was occurring, LaRocque used his position of authority and trust, as well as, the dependency relationship that he had fostered with the Plaintiff, to ensure that the Plaintiff did not tell anyone about the behaviours they had engaged in.

64. LaRocque's behaviour constituted sexual abuse and assault. It was also a breach of the duty of care that he owed to the Plaintiff in that, inter alia, he did wilfully and/or negligently inflict pain and suffering, mental suffering, humiliation and degradation upon the Plaintiff, assaulted the Plaintiff and interfered with his normal upbringing and childhood solely for the purpose of his own gratification.

65. Additionally LaRocque counselled, encouraged and protected other priests within Alexandria-Cornwall that were engaging in deviant sexual activities with young males, including but not limited to Scott.

66. In doing such LaRocque became one of the leading members of a pedophile clan (the "Clan") based out of Cornwall, Ontario. His involvement in the Clan allowed for the continuation of his acts of sexual abuse of the Plaintiff and others and both deterred and prevented the Plaintiff from exposing the abuse and seeking redress, treatment and healing.

67. LaRocque was instrumental in forming the Clan, whose complete membership is not fully known to the Plaintiff but the following people were either members of the Clan or through passive and/or active participation, wilful blindness or complicity assisted in the perpetration of the Clan's activities:

a. Father Charles MacDonald;

b. Ken Seguin;

c. Nelson Barque

d. Richard Hickerson;

e. Monsignor R.J. MacDonald;

f. Father John McPhail;

g. Father John Donihee;

h. Father Norman Loney;

i. Malcom MacDonald;

j. Dr. Arthur Peachy; and

k. Brian Dufour;

68. LaRocque's membership, leadership and assistance to the Clan, whether it be intentional and/or negligent, which involved abuses of his ecclesiastical office allowed him and Scott to abuse the Plaintiff without fear of recourse and contributed to the damages suffered by the Plaintiff. For such involvement in the Clan, as it contributed to the damages suffered by the Plaintiff, LaRocque is in law responsible.

The Actions of Scott:

69. Following ordination, selection and training, Alexandria-Cornwall granted Scott the necessary spiritual rights and faculties to act as a priest within Alexandria-Cornwall. He was immediately posted to parish work within Alexandria-Cornwall.

70. The Plaintiff met Scott through the Church of which he was a member. Through his position as a priest and representative of the Alexandria-Cornwall, Scott befriended himself to the Plaintiff and his family.

71. Scott engaged in activities with the Plaintiff in his capacity as a parish priest, counselling him in religion, Catholic education and other matters. The Plaintiff became an altar server under the tutelage of Scott and was also involved with a Church sponsored youth group.

72. Through his position as parish priest, teacher and representative of Alexandria-Cornwall, Scott was to Plaintiff an important ecclesiastical authority to the Plaintiff.

73. Scott used his position as a priest of the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall, which was a position of authority and trust, to develop a close personal relationship with the Plaintiff when he was young. The relationships that Scott developed with the Plaintiff, under the guise of a friendship based on a priest-parishioner relationship, allowed Scott an opportunity to be alone with the Plaintiff and to exert total control over him, prey upon him and sexually abuse him.

74. Commencing in or about the year 1974 when the plaintiff, was 17 years old and for the following three years, Scott repeatedly sexually abused, assaulted and molested the Plaintiff, exposed him to prurient sexual behaviour, encouraged him to engage in deviant and prurient sexual behaviour and taught them how to be rewarded for doing so. The particulars of same are as follows:

(a) exposing his naked body to the Plaintiff;

(b) fondling the naked body of the Plaintiff, including but not limited to his penis, scrotum and buttocks;

(c) directing the Plaintiff to fondle the naked body of Scott, including but not limited to his penis, scrotum and buttocks;

(d) masturbating the Plaintiff;

(e) directing the Plaintiff to masturbate Scott;

(f) performing fellatio on the Plaintiff;

(g) directing the Plaintiff to perform fellatio on Scott;

(h) sodomizing and anally penetrating the Plaintiff;

(i) ejaculating on or in the Plaintiff;

(j) engaging in other sexual activities with the Plaintiff;

(k) in order to facilitate the abuses Scott engaged in a pattern of behaviour which was intended to make the Plaintiff feel that he was special in the eyes of Scott, the Church and God; and

(l) in order to facilitate the abuses Scott also engaged in a pattern of behaviour which was intended to make the Plaintiff feel that his soul was in jeopardy.

75. The abovementioned activity occurred after the Plaintiff had reached the age of consent, in which case the Plaintiff pleads that no consent was possible owing to the power dependency relationship between the Plaintiff and Scott.

76. The aforementioned behaviours occurred on premises, which were owned or controlled by the defendant Alexandria-Cornwall, specifically the Church and related rectory as well as the rectory at Saint Raphael parish.

77. The aforementioned behaviour occurred on a regular and repeated basis. As time progressed, the abuse intensified in both frequency and nature. All of the aforementioned behaviours were related to priest/parishioner activities.

78. Throughout the period of time that the aforementioned behaviour was occurring, Scott used his position of authority and trust, as well as, the dependency relationship that he had fostered with the Plaintiff, to ensure that the Plaintiff did not tell anyone about the behaviours they had engaged in.

79. Scott's behaviour constituted sexual abuse and assault. It was also a breach of the duty of care that he owed to the Plaintiff in that, inter alia, he did wilfully and/or negligently inflict pain and suffering, mental suffering, humiliation and degradation upon the Plaintiff, assaulted the Plaintiff and interfered with his normal upbringing and childhood solely for the purpose of his own gratification.

Damages:

80. The Plaintiff states, and the fact is, that as a direct result of the behaviour of the defendants he has suffered damages and losses, the particulars of which are as follows:

(a) physical pain;

(b) mental anguish;

(d) loss of enjoyment of faith;

(e) loss of religious life/beliefs;

(f) impairment of his opportunity to experience a normal adolescence and adulthood;

(g) impairment of his ability and opportunity to obtain and complete an education appropriate to his abilities/aptitude;

(h) impairment of his ability to earn an income and support himself and time off work due to emotional trauma;

(i) impairment of his mental health and emotional well being;

(j) loss of interdependent relationship;

(k) clinical depression;

(l) post traumatic stress disorder; and

(m) a loss of enjoyment of life.

81. The Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer physical, emotional and mental pain and suffering and a loss of enjoyment of life. The Plaintiff was deprived of a normal healthy childhood and adolescence as a result of the actions or in-actions of the defendants. The life of the Plaintiff was fundamentally and forever changed by the above-noted behaviour.

82. The Plaintiff was so profoundly negatively affected by these behaviours and activities that he spent many of the formative years of his life struggling to deal with the physical, mental, psychological and emotional sequelae of these events. The Plaintiff has suffered the following:

(a) failure/drop-out of school;

(b) addiction to alcohol/drugs;

(d) difficulties with the law; and

(e) a propensity to engage in reckless and careless behaviour.

83. The Plaintiff has suffered a tremendous loss of enjoyment of life and ongoing pain and suffering. His ability to carry on a normal life has been extinguished or impaired.

84. The Plaintiff has suffered physical, mental, psychological and emotional stress, shock and suffering which will continue forever.

85. The Plaintiff has been required to undergo medical treatment and psychological counselling and will continue to require same indefinitely throughout his lifetime.

86. The Plaintiff has sustained out-of-pocket expenses the particulars will be provided prior to the trial of the within action.

87. The Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer economic losses, including past income loss, future and ongoing income loss, loss of competitive advantage and various other out-of-pocket expenses the particulars of which will be provided.

88. The Plaintiff pleads that the conduct of the defendants, as described herein, was harsh, high-handed, malicious and as such, should be punished with aggravated and/or punitive damages.

89. The Plaintiff has only recently been able to face these effects and relate the extent of his victimization to the sexual abuse perpetrated upon him by the defendant's Scott and LaRocque and the failure of the other defendants to act appropriately.

90. To this day the Plaintiff has not fully realized the extent of his victimization but for the purposes of discoverability the Plaintiff had adequate awareness of the impact of these matters as of approximately January 2005.

91. The Plaintiff relies upon the discoverability rule and the doctrine of fraudulent concealment. The parties were in a special relationship with each other and given that relationship, the defendants' abovementioned actions amount to an unconscionable thing and the effect of the defendants' conduct has given rise to a concealment of the cause of action.

92. The Plaintiff relies upon the State Immunity Act, R.S.C. 1990, c.S-18, the Negligence Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.N1., and Schedule B of the Constitution Act, 1982 being the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

93. The Plaintiff proposes that this action be tried in the City of Ottawa.

Date of Issue: P. M. LEDROIT (LSUC#12470Q)

Ledroit Beckett

Litigation Lawyers

630 Richmond Street

LONDON, Ontario

N6A 3G6

Tel: (519) 673-4994

Fax: (519) 432-1660

ADRIEN DONAT ST. LOUIS and THE HOLY SEE (STATE OF THE VATICAN CITY), THE COLLEGE OF CARDINALS OF THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, as Represented by ALOYSIUS MATTHEW CARDINAL AMBROZIC, ALOYSIUS MATTHEW CARDINAL AMBROZIC, THE ROMAN CATHOLIC EPISCOPAL CORPORTATION OF THE DIOCESE OF LONDON, THE ROMAN CATHOLIC EPISCOPAL CORPORATION OF THE DIOCESE OF ALEXANDRIA-CORNWALL, BISHOP EUGENE LAROCQUE, and The Estate of DONALD SCOTT by his Litigation Administrator, Gordon Cudmore

Court file no.

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

Proceedings commenced at the City of London

___________________________________

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

____________________________________

P. M. LEDROIT (LSUC#12470Q)

Ledroit Beckett

Litigation Lawyers

630 Richmond Street

LONDON, Ontario

N6A 3G6

Tel: (519) 673-4994

742 FREE STATE OF THE ART HEALTH CARE

2005-06-12T02:33:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS JUNE 13-16, 2005

205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA,COIrIMENT:http://thevoiceless.blogspot.con FAX(613)235-5573
ONTARIO K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca

DEAR HEAD OF NATION SEE: http//politheft.blogspot.com
FREE STATE OF THE ART HEALTH CARE TALK:

I SHALL EXPECT ALL NATIONS

TO SIGN A TREATY TO PROVIDE FREE HEALTH CARE
FOR ALL CITIZENS OF ALL NATIONS IN THE WORLD
FOR DNA MEDICAL CARE.

(A) PROVIDE UNIVERSITIES TO GRANT
- GENERAL PRACTICE DEGREES

AND SPECIALIST MEDICAL DEGREES
IN DNA HEALTH CARE PROCEDURES.
(B) PROVIDE COMPUTER REGISTRYS
FOR ALL CITIZENS OF ALL NATIONS

TO ACCESS THE FREE DNA CARE.
(C) PROVIDE COMPUTERIZED ACCESS
TO ALL MEDICAL OFFICES

SET UP TO PROVIDE CARE.
(D) TO PROVIDE A DATA BASE
FOR ALL PROCEDURES AVAILABLE.
PROVIDE NEW PROCEDURE.
OBTAIN MEDICAL RELEASES WHERE NECESARY.
(E) TO PROVIDE DNA SOLUTIONS

TO BY PASS SURGERY OF ANY KIND.
(F) TO PROVIDE ANALYSIS OF FOOD
TO PROVIDE THE BEST NUTRITION
IN EACH NATION

FOR HEALTHY BODILY FUNCTION.
(G) TO PROVIDE EARLY WARNING
OF AN EPIDEMIC

AND PROCEDURES TO MEET THE EPIDEMIC
AND MEDIA ACCESS.

(H) TO PHASE OUT ALL HOSPITALS
AND TO PROVIDE MORTGAGE FINANCING
FOR ALL MEDICAL HIGH TECK EQUIPMENT AND OFFICES.
(I) TO NEGOTIATE WITH PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATIONS
TO OBTAIN THE BEST PRICE

FOR ALL DNA PRODUCTS AND INTERVENTIONS.
(J) TO PROVIDE A MEDICAL USE INFORMATION CARD
TO INCLUDE INFORMATION

ON ALCOHOL, CIGARETTE, DRUG USE.

AT THE PRESENT TIME THE POOR IN THE WORLD
HAVE NO ACCESS

TO STATE OF THE ART MEDICAL TECKNOLOGY
AND THIS WILL ALLOW THE POOR

TO HAVE ACCESS TO THIS TECKNOLOGY
BY TRAINED MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS.
IT IS TIME TO HAVE A GLOBAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.
SUFFERING HUMANITY DESERVES IT.

PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO: 192 HEADS OF NATIONS. LETTER NO 742 E-MAIL ON.

741 EBOLA PART 2 & ALGAE TALK

2005-06-09T07:32:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS JUNE 10-12, 2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA,COMMENT:http://thevoiceless.blogspot.con FAX(613)235-5573
ONTARIO K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION SEE: http://politheft.blogspot.com
EBOLA AND MARBURG PART 2 TALK: SEE LETTER NO: 734. SEE: TORONTO
STAR JUNE 6/05/P1 THE GLOBE & MAIL JUNE 6/05/All CONGRATULATIONS
RESEARCHERS AT HEALTH CANADAS NATIONAL MICROBIOLOGY LABORATORY
IN WINNIPEG INCLUDING US ARMY RESEARCHERS FOR THE SINGLE DOSE
VACCINE THAT PROTECTS MONKEYS AGAINST EBOLA/MARBURG. IT IS THE
FIRST TIME A VACCINE HAS BEEN KNOWN TO WORK IN MONKEYS. THANK
YOU ON BEHALF OF THE MONKEYS AND GORILLAS THAT I EXPECT TO BE
VACCINATED IN THE NEAR FUTURE TO STOP THE SPREAD OF THE DISEASE
IN AFRICA. A HUMAN VACCINE COULD BE READY IN 5 YEARS. I SHALL
EXPECT HUMAN VICTIMS OF EBOLA/MARBURG TO BE VACCINATED AS THE
DEATH RATE IS 100% AND THE VACCINE MAY BE 80% EFFECTIVE IN SAVING
TEIR LIVES. DO A DOUBLE BLIND STUDY IF POSSIBLE IMMEDIATELY.
PLEASE USE THE VACCINE ON GORILLAS IMMEDIATELY THERE ARE 94,500
WESTERN LOWLAND GORILLAS IN THE EFFECTED AREA. START IN GORILLA
PARKS WHERE 20,000 LIVE. THERE ARE ABOUT 78,000 CHIMPANZEES.
PLEASE TRAIN AFRICANS TO ADMINISTER THE VACCINE. THE RESEARCH
IS PUBLISHED IN NATURE MEDICINE. CONGRATULATIONS CANADA ON YOUR
LEVEL 4 LABORATORY IN WINNIPEG AND TO ALL ITS STAFF ESPECIALLY
DR FRANK PLUMMER THE DIRECTOR. THE PRESENT OUTBREAK IN AFRICA
HAS RESULTED IN 335 DEATHS.
I SHALL EXPECT A GLOBAL TREATY TO HAVE ALL NATIONS NOT USE
EBOLA/MARBURG/SARS/HIV AND OTHER DISEASES TO BE ADDED TO THE
TREATY AS BIOLOGICAL TERROR WEAPONS.
PROTECTION OF ANIMALS IS THE FIRST STEP IN PROTECTING HUMANS.
I SHALL EXPECT RESEARCHERS INTO ALL DISEASES IN THE TREATY TO
BE PROTECTED FROM LEGAL ACTION PROVIDED HIGH TECH RESEARCH
PROGRAMS ARE FOLLOWED. I SHALL EXPECT NATIONS WHERE THESE
DISEASES ARE PRESENT TO GIVE PROTECTION AGAINST LEGAL ACTION
SO VICTIMS CAN BE USED FOR TESTING.
ALGAE TALK: RESEARCHERS IN THE NATION OF RUSSIA HAVE DEVELOPED
A FAST GROWING ALGAE THAT COULD SUPPLY THE EARTHS NEED FOR
OYGEN/ ENERGY/ FOOD & CLEANING UP POLLUTED WATER IN RIVERS/LAKES
AROUND THE WORLD. THE SCIENTISTS NEED $25 MILLION US TO CONTINUE
RESEARCH AND I SHALL EXPECT THE 192 NATIONS OF THE WORLD TO
HAVE JOINT OWNERSHIP OF ALL PATENTS AND TO SUPPLY ALL FUNDS
FOR THE RESEARCH. I AM CONCERNED WITH THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
AT PAGES 32 AND 33 OF THE TEXT " KING SOLOMONS RING BY KONRAD
Z LORENZ (GERMAN TRANSLATION IN 1952) AND PUBLISHED IN BRITAIN
BY RICHARD CLAY AND COMPANY LTD 1953. PAGE 32 "AS IN A NATURAL
POND OR LAKE, INDEED AS ALL OVER OUR WHOLE PLANET, ANIMAL AND
VEGETABLE BEINGS LIVE TOGETHER IN BIOLOGICAL EQUALIBRIUM. THE
CARBON DIOXIDE WHICH THE ANIMALS BREATH OUT IS ASSIMILATED BY
THE PLANTS, WHICH IN THEIR TURN EXHALE OXYGEN. PLANTS BREATH
IN OXYGEN AND BREATH OUT CARBON DIOXIDE,JUST AS ANIMALS DO BUT,
APART FROM THIS THE GROWING GREEN PLANT ASSIMILATES CARBON
DIOXIDE--THAT IS IT USES THE CARBON FOR THE BUILDING UP OF ITS
BODY SUBSTANCE-THE PLANT EATS CARBON DIOXIDE. DURING THIS PROCESS
IT EXCRETES OXYGEN IN EXCESS OF ITS OWN BREATHING AND FROM THIS
SURPLUS MAN AND ANIMALS BREATHE. FINALLY PLANTS ARE ABLE TO
ASSIMILATE THE PRODUCTS OF DEAD BODIES DECOMPOSED BY BACTERIA
AND MAKE THEM AVAILABLE TO THE GREAT LIFE CYCLE. THE
CONSTRUCTORS--PLANTS/THE CONSUMERS-ANIMALS/ THE DECOMPOSERS
-BACTERIA. AN EXCESS OF ANIMALS CAN RESULT IN PLANET MELT DOWN
BY EXCESS BACTERIA.
PLEASE PROTECT THE GREEN PLANTS OF THE EARTH.
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO;192 HEADS OF NATIONS.LETTER NO:741 E-MAIL ON.

740-1 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T14:53:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS JUNE 6-9, 2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA,COMMENT:http://thevoiceless.blogspot.com FAX(613)235-5573
ONTARIO K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION SEE: http://politheft.blogspot.com
THE PATH OF INJUSTICE TALK: JUDGEIGOMERY HAS UNCOVERED IN HIS
HEARINGS ON CORRUPTION IN CANADA: THAT LAWYERS WILL WORK FOR
A POLITICAL PARTY AND IF THE MEMBER IN A RIDING IS ELECTED THEY
EXPECT KICKBACKS FOR A JOB WELL DONE. ONE OF THOSE KICKBACKS
IS TO BE MADE A JUDGE FOR THE PARTY WHO WILL FOLLOW THE
GOVERNMENT AND PARTY ORDERS. JUDGES HAVE NO INDEPENDENCE FROM
GOVERNMENT. IF THEY WANT TO GET AHEAD THEY DO WHAT THE GOVERNMENT
TELLS THEM. THE GOVERNMENT WHICH'IS FULL OF LAWYERS AS MEMBERS
AND CIVIL SERVANTS KEEP PASSING LAWS FOR PEOPLE TO BREAK AND
MAKE LAWYERS AND JUDGES RICH. THE POOR HAVE NO PLACE IN THE
APPEAL PROCESS IN THE COURTS OF APPEAL & THE SUPREME COURT OF
CANADA AS YOU FIRST REQUIRE AN ORDER FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL. THIS
IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BUT ITS A MONEY MAKER AND KEEPS THE POOR
FROM JUSTICE. THERE IS ONLY JUSTICE FOR THE SUPER RICH. LAWYERS
LEGAL FEES ARE $300 TO $1000 PER HOUR AND SPECIAL LAWYERS ARE
TRAINED FOR APPEAL COURTS. BRIBERY AND THEFT BY LAWYERS AND
JUDGES IS RAMPANT. EXAMPLE: I HAVE WORKED FOR MR & MRS CHAVALI
WHOSE $57 MILLION DOLLARS OF OTTAWA PROPERTY WAS STOLEN BY
GOWLING STRATHY A LARGE OTTAWA LAW FIRM THAT GETS A MAJORITY
OF ITS WORK FROM THE GOVERNMENT. THE FIRM KICKS BACK MONEY TO
JUDGES FOR JUDGMENTS IN THEIR FAVOR AND JUDGES GET A STEP UP
THE LADDER OF JUDICIAL CORRUPTION. FOR 16 YEARS JUDGES PROTECTED
GOWLING STRATHY AND THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA FROM
BANKRUPTCY. THE CHAVALIES HAD A TRIAL THAT HAD JUST STARTED
BEFORE JUDGE MANDEL WHEN JUDGE CUMMING RAN INTO THE JUDGES
CHAMBERS WITH AN ORDER TO STOP THE TRIAL AS THE CHAVALIES HAD
BEEN DECLARED FRIVOLOUS AND VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS WITH THE CONSENT
OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO CHARLES HARNICK WHO HAD WORKED
FOR 17 MONTHS WITH 44 LAWYERS AND JUDGE MCPHERSON TO PROVIDE
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WITH AN APPLICATION OF FACTS THAT WOULD
ALLOW HIM TO GIVE HIS CONSENT. THE CHAVALIES WERE NEVER ALLOWED
TO ANSWER THESE FACTS BEFORE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WHOSE DUTY
IT IS TO MAKE AND UPHOLD THE RULES OF ONTARIO COURTS SO PARTIES
CLAIMS SHALL BE HEARD. MR & MRS CHAVALI AND THEIR SON DR RAM
CHAVALI BROUGHT APPLICATIONS TO OVERTURN THE ORDER & CONSENT
& BROUGHT APPLICATION THAT SECTION 140 OF THE COURTS OF JUSTICE
ACT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BEFORE JUDGE CUMMINGS WHO FAILED TO
RULE ON THE APPLICATION. THE APPLICATION BEFORE HIM WAS NOT
SERVED ON DR RAM CHAVALI AN AMERICAN RESIDENT EITHER & SHOULD
NOT HAVE PROCEEDED BUT THE GOVERNMENT JUDGES HAD TO STOP THE
TRIAL THAT WAS TO BEGIN BEFORE JUDGE MANDEL ORDERED BY JUDGE
WILKINS. JUDGE CUMMINGS GAVE COSTS TO THE DEFENDANT JUDGES &
LAWYERS & LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA AND THEIR INSURERS. THE
BILL OF COSTS WAS $180,000.00 +- & IT OUTLINED THE CONSPIRACY
BY 44 LAWYERS AND JUDGE MCPHERSON WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
TO GET HIS CONSENT. THIS BILL OF COSTS WAS DELIVERED ABOUT A
YEAR AFTER THE HEARING BEFORE JUDGE CUMMINGS. THE CHAVALIS
APPEALED TO THE COURT OF APPEAL & WERE DIRECTED BACK TO THE
SUPERIOR COURT TO GET A CONSENT UNDER SEC 140 TO APPEAL. JUDGE
NORDHEIMER WAS APPOINTED WITHOUT JUDICIAL AUTHORITY TO CASE
MANAGE THE THEFT TO MAKE SURE THE GOVERNMENT WON. JUDGE
NORDHEIMER RULED THE CHAVALIES COULD NOT APPEAL. THE CORRUPT
LAWYERS & JUDGES HAVE NOT ALLOWED A TRIAL IN 16 YEARS.SEE BLDG:
http://p itheft.blogspot.com BLDG NO 740-1 TO 19 CORRUPTION PROOF
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO :192 HEADS OF NATION. LETTER N0:740-1 TO 19

740-2 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T14:40:00.000-07:00

Court File Nos. C29428(98-CV- 141167) and 02-CV-240696CM1

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN

REDDY RAJAGOPAL CHAVALI, REDDY KRISHNAVENI CHAVALI,
REDDY VENYATA SUBBARAMI CHAVALI, SADANA CORPORATION LTD.,
VAHINI HOLDINGS LTD., MERU HOLDINGS LTD., 715048 ONTARIO LTD., 715040
ONTARIO LTD., KSHAMA CORPORATION, LYON LAURIER DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, NIKOLAUS WOLF and LYON LAURIER PLACE DEVELOPMENT LTD.
LAURIER PLACE DEVELOPMENT LTD.

' Applicants/Respondents

-and-

(1)THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA and
(2)LAWYER'S PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY,
(3)NELLIGAN/POWER,
(4)GEORGE GATY,
(5)ROYAL TRUST CORPORATION OF CANADA,
(6)PEAT MARWICK THORNE INC.,
(7)SAMUEL TALBERT and COLETTE TALBERT
Respondents/Applicants

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPLICANTS ON COSTS

REDDY KRISHNA VENT CHAVAM
1260 Broadview Avenue
Toronto, Ontario
M4K 2T4
Tel ( 416) 467-7388
Fax: (416) 467-7388
For the Applicants/Appellants

And
DR REDDY VENKATA SUBBARAMI CHAVALI
DR.RAM CHAVAl.11
359 Kent Street
Brookline(Boston) Massachusetts
U.S.A 02446

Tel: (617) 734-5015

For the Applicant ?Appellants

740-3 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T14:27:00.000-07:00

-2
TO: Nelligan O'Brien Payne LLP
Barristers & Solicitors
1900-66 Slater Street

Ottawa, Ontario KIP 5HI

Allan R O'Brien
Tel: (613) 238-8080
Fax: (613) 238-2098
Solicitors for the Respondents The Law Society of Upper Canada,
Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company, Nelligan/Power, and
Royal Trust Corporation of Canada

AND TO: Hamilton Appotive LLP
Barristers & Solicitors
110 Floor, 150 Metcalfe Street
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 1PI
Eric Appotive

Tel: (613) 238-8400
Fax: (613) 238-4085
Solicitors for the Respondent Peat Marwick Thorne Inc.

AND TO: Piazza Brooks
Barristers & Solicitors
309 Cooper Street, Suite 202
Ottawa, Ontario K2P OG5

Rick Brooks
Tel: (613) 238-2244
Fax: (613) 238-3382
Solicitor for the Respondents Samuel Talbert and Colette Talbert

740-4 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T14:11:00.000-07:00

SUBMISSIONS 1

1. On December l l, 2002, the Applicants filed an Application 02-CV-240696CM1 in the
Superior Court of Justice, for Leave to go to the Court of Appeal, as per the Court of Appeal
Registrar's endorsement of November 29, 2002.

2. The Applicants Application challenges that
(i) the Consents of the Attorney General of Ontario dated July 17, 1997 and December 19, 1997 as a conspiratorial fraudulent breach of his judicial Statutory duties and Unconstitutional;
(ii) the Order of Mr. Justice Cumming of March 30, 1998, upholding this fraudulent conspiratorial order on December 16, 1998, upheld by the Ontario Court of appeal is Unconstitutional and the manner of Applying section 140 Courts of Justice Act (CJA) is Unconsdtudonal, based on the new evidence obtained after December 16, 1998, the Bill of Costs proving the conspiracy of lawyers and Judges and the Ex-Attorney General of Ontario, which has been uncontradicted and has not been addressed by
the Court. Hence the Costs should be reversed and the Applicants be granted costs not only for
the written submissions, but also costs from the beginning o f the application for section 140
CJA by the Law Society of Upper Canada [LSUC] and Lawyers professional Indemnity
Company (LPIC] and especially it was unlawful by Mr. Justice Nordheimer stating that Dr.
Ram Chavali should pay costs, totally ignoring the fact that Or. Ram Chavali was not served
with the original February 6, 1998 Application itself by the LSUC, LPIC which is clearly
documented in the Bill of Costs. Mr. Justice Nordheimer made his order on April 18, 2005
ignoring the evidence in the Bill of Costs of LSUC and LPIC.'..

3. Applicants filed the Constitutional Question before Mr. Justice Cumming and the Attorney
General of Ontario wrote on February 26, 1998 that "Further to your Notice of Constitutional
Question dated February 13, 1998, please be advised that the Attorney General will not
intervene in this matter". Mr. Justice Cumming failed to rule on the Constitutional question
in his decision of March 30, 1998 despite the fact the material was before Mr. Justice
Cumming and the Court of Appeal. Mr. Justice Nordheimer failed to rule on the Constitutional
Question saying the Constitutional Question was not before Mr. Justice Cumming when it was.

Application Record VoL I Tab. 3 P 134-140 access-freedom of information and protection of privacy..

740-5 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T13:54:00.000-07:00

4. Applicants served and filed before Mr. Justice Nordheimer the Constitutional Question
dated August 23, 2002 and February 15, 2005 and the corrected written submissions on the
Constitutional Question on March 7, 2005. The Attorney General for Ontario [AGO] on March
9, 2005 stated that "AGO does not intend to intervene at this stage of the proceeding"
Admitting that s.140 Courts of Justice Act is in violation of the Constitution Act and the manner
of applying is Unconstitutional knowing of the fraudulent conspiracy of the Attorney General of
Ontario and 44 lawyers and unethical conduct of Judges namely MacPherson J. and Cumming J.

5. Mr. Justice Nordheimer in his decision of April 18, 2005 stated that "It does not appear that the Constitutionality of section 140 was raised either before Mr. Justice Cumming or before the Court of appeal, 77se Court of appeal would not normally consider such a question, at this latter stage, without having a decision of first instance on the issue." Mr. Justice Nordheimer acted as a Judge of the Court of Appeal, clearly outside of his jurisdiction.

"First Instance": here also has to be considered that the Superior Court as the competent Court
and Mr. justice Nordheimer is the Judge of the Superior Court and unequivocally it is his duty also to see the Constitutional material filed in front of him, instead of stating contrary to the fact that the Constitution question has been in front of both the Judges namely Cumming J and
Nordheimer J.

Reasons for decision of Nordheiner J, of April 18, 2005 P6 Para 14.

6. The Leave application 02-CV-240696CM1 cites violations of Sections 21,122, 139, 319,
322, 341, 363, 366, 380, 429(1) and 430 of the Criminal Code and Sections l, 2(d), 7, 8,
11(a)(b), 12, 15, 24(l)(2) and 52 the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and
Sections 1(a)(b), 2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Costs These violation have been
uncontradicted and the order herein does not address the Criminality of the
Respondents.

7. The Trial in fraud Action 97-CV-120561 was scheduled by the Honourable Mr.
Justice Wilkins for 5 weeks and arranged Trial Judge as Mr. Justice Mandel. While all
the parties, including lawyers and witnesses were ready to proceed, on March 30,1998,
and making opening statements, Mr. Justice Mandel stated that Mr. Justice Cumming
came running to his Chambers, moments before the Trial and stopped Trial with s.140
CJA Order of March 30, 1998, contrary to the evidence before him. This is a clear
violation of Constitutional Rights under s. 7 and s.15 of the Applicants

740-7CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T11:40:00.000-07:00

8. "The Supreme Court has held it has jurisdiction to grant leave in order to review a lower
court's decision on the Constitutionality of a criminal law, not with standing that no appeal
to the Court may be brought under the criminal Code":

Rv. Laba [1994) 3 S.C.R.965

9. The Supreme Court made the following points:

-when the Constitutionality of a law is challenged in the context of criminal proceedings, the
determination of culpability and constitutionality are two distinct rulings

- under the "dual proceedings approach" developed in R.v. Laba,[1994] 3 S.C.R.965 the
Court has jurisdiction to hear applications for leave under section 40 of the Supreme Court
Act on any ground questioning the Constitutionality of a Criminal Code Provision

-either party may seek leave to appeal rulings on Constitutionality, regardless of whether the
ruling on culpability is appealed

- when a Constitutional issue is put before the Court through any of the appeals provided for
in the Criminal Code, there is no need to seek leave under section 40

10. Section 24(1) Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedonts [See Paragraph 6 cited
above]

Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by the Charter, have been infringed or,
denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court
considers appropriate and just in the circumstances .

11. Proven and glaring incompetence of counsel for the Applicants before Cumming J.
on March 12-13, 1998, not to make any submissions contrary to the Retainer
Agreement demonstrating himself while the Respondentc/Defendants' solicitors were
laughing at him, attending the Court with no knowledge of the case, is violation of
section 7 of the Charter with regards to the Applicants.

Ky. Strauss (1995), 100 C.C.C(3d) 303, 61 B.CA.C 241,100 WA.C.241(C.A.)

12. Similarly the counsel for the Appellants/Applicants, surprisingly started his
argument on December 16,1998 before the Court of Appeal Panel saying that "Cumming
.J., was senile". The Panel got furious and the Chairman of the Panel, Mr. Justice
kinlayson chastised him by stating that "Do you mean that Cumming J. should not be on
the Bench?". Without further proceeding with his argument, counsel Mr. Jerry Levitan
ended his presentation, contrary to the Retainer Agreement. It is clear that the glaring
incompetence of counsel Jerry Levitan amounts to violation of section 7 of the Charter.

Rv. Strauss (1995), 100 C C C (3d) 303, 61 B. C.C.A., 100W.A 241 (C.A.)

740-7CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T11:21:00.000-07:00

13. Section 131(1) of the Courts ofJustice Act states as follows:

Subject to the provisions of an Actor rules of Court, the costs of and incidental to a
proceeding or a step in a proceeding are in the discretion of the Court, and the
Court may determine by whom and to what extent the costs shall be paid

Courts of Justice Act, RSO. 1990,c.C43, section 131(1)

14. "The right to be tried by an independent and impartial tribunal is an integral part of
the principles of fundamental Justice under s.7 and that right includes the concept of
institutional impartiality".

Ruffo v. Quebec(conseil de la magistrature),1995 4 S.C.R. 267(Ruffo.v.conseil de lamagistrature)
130D.L.R(4th)1, 33 C.R.R.(2d) 269,190NR1

15. The rule of law is the very foundation of the Charter There cannot be a rule of law
without access to the courts. The courts are empowered to provide a remedy in the event of
Charter Right infringement. Mr. Justice Nordheimer blocked the Applicants to go to the
Ontario Court of Appeal to set aside the Order of December 16, 1999 using s. 140(4)(e)
and other questionable facts

B. C. G.E. U. v. Bristfsh Columbia (Attorney General) (1988-2 S. C.R.214--11988-6 W. W.R 577, 44 C. C C. (3d)
289, 30 CPC(2d) 221, 53 D.LR.(4'")1, 87 NR241, 31 BCLR.(2d) 273, 71 Nfld. & PEIR.93

16. Rule 57.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure states that, in exercising its discretion
under section 131 of the Courts of Justice Act to awards costs, in addition to the result of the
proceeding, the court may consider any offer to settle or to contribute made in writing, (d)
the importance of issues, (e) the conduct of any party that tended to shorten or lengthen
unnecessarily the duration of the proceeding; (f) whether anv step in the proceeding was
improper or vexatious or unnecessary j) any other matter relevant to the question of costs.
(4) Nothing in this rule or rules 57.02 to 57.07 affects the authority of the court under section
131 of the Courts of Justice act, (a) to award or refuse costs in respect of a particular issue
or part of a proceeding.

17. The uncontradicted evidence before this Honourable Court is that the Applicants
are the victims of prima facie fraud, theft, violation of their Constitutional Rights and are
abused by the Officers of the Court and the State and hence the costs are clearly from the
beginning to be against the Respondents/Defendants

740-8 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T11:02:00.000-07:00

18. A Party can move pursuant to Rule 21.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to strike
out a pleading on the basis that it discloses no reasonable cause of action. Defendants/
Respondents never brought such a motion in any one of the Applicants/ Plaintiffs'
Actions and it is admitted by Mark Geddes of Nelligan/Power, acting for the Law
Society under oath admitted on February 28, 2000, that they never brought any motion
under Rule 21.01 in the past 14 years.

Madam Justice Wilson of the Supreme Court of Canada stated "... assuming that the
facts as stated in the Statement of Claim can be proved, is it `plain and obvious" that the
Plaindfj's statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action?.. if there is a chance
that the plaintiff might succeed, then the Plaintiff should not be "driven from the judgment
seat" There is clearly a chance from the Bill of Costs and facts that we shall succeed and
in fact succeeded by several Judges scheduling Trials after satisfying all the Criteria for
Trials

Hunt v. T & N Plc [1990)2 S. C.R. 959,[1990] S. C.J No. 93 (S. C. C)

19. The uncontradicted evidence before this Honourable Court is that the Applicants
are Senior Citizens living on limited resources of old age pension and became
impecunious because of the, fraudulent activities of the RespondentslDefendants [ See
Cross-Motion record of Impecuniousityl. The Applicants are vulnerable victims of prima
facie fraud and theft by the Respondents/ defendants but Mr. Justice Nordheimer would
not allow the Applicants' Cross Motion to be heard

20. Cory J. in Bank Electronics Limited v. Olvan Tool & Die Incorporated stated that

"It must be remembered that a requirement that costs of an interlocutory application be
made forthwith may prevent a meritorious action from coneing to Trial"

Several Actions were scheduled for Trial by over 12 Judges both from the Superior Court
and the Court ofAnpeal for Ontario. This proves that we have meritorious actions

Bank Electronics Limited v. Olvan Tool & Die Incorporated 21 C.P.C 1981 P 231 at 232

21 "One factor to be borne in mind by the Court in making this determination is that in a
Public law case costs will not always be awarded to the successful party if, for example,
that party is the Government and the opposing party is an individual Charter Claimant of
limited means. Another factor to be considered is the extent to which the issues raised are
ofpublic importance, and the public interest in bringing those issues before the court."

740-9CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T10:46:00.000-07:00

This action is clearly of Public Importance because of the criminal activity of the judicial
authorities and the Respondent/Defendants

British Columbia (Minister of Forests) v. Okanagan Indian Nand 120031233
D.L.R(46) 577 at 598 &GC.

22 The Bill of costs produced by the Law Society clearly identified, criminal conspiracy, state
interference, uncontradicted evidence offraud, judicial misconduct, violation o£ Constitutional
Rights of the Applicants guaranteed under sections 1, 2(d), 7, 8,11,12,15, 24, and 52 the
Charter ofBights and Freedoms. The Uncontardicted evidence of no proof of service on Dr.
Ram Chavali; a resident of United States and his solely owned Kshama Corporation of the
Application Record under s.140 Courts of Justice Act, the originating process nor was there
evidence of a Court order for the alternate service (Substitution service).

23. Trevor McDonald of Nelligan/Power, representing the Law Society and others, never
contradicted prima facie fraudulent, criminal and improper conduct of the Respondents
provided in the affidavit of Reddy Chavali with documentary evidence, now writes in
Paragraphs 8, 9,10 and 11 of his submissions is outrageous and nothing short of
professional misconduct and should be given punitive costs against him and the Respondents
herein. He could not challenge even one statement regarding the judicious mischief of
Cumming's order of March 30, 1998, supported with documentary evidence. We refer you to
the Rules of Professional Conduct, notable those relating to lawyer's duties and
responsibilities to their client, Court opposing counsel, and the administration of justice
Further,Trevor McDonald of Nelligan/Power, representing haw Society, Lawyer's
professional Indemnity Company and Nelligan/Power made baseless, disparaging,
scandalous and unproven statements and submissions as if he is licensed to do so.

Baksh v. Sun Media(Toronto) Corp. (2003), 63 O.R(3d) 51(Master)

24. Prima facie, this case is of Constitutional tort, destruction of evidence [Application
Record Tab.1 P48A-48D], search and seizure without a search warrant, committed under
color of State law is actionable and must be tried. Further, this case is of government tort

740-9 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T10:31:00.000-07:00

intentional tort and violation ofRights and criminal acts is in contravention of s. 1, s.2(d),

s. 7, s.8,s.11(a)(b), s.12, s.15, s.24(1)(2) and s.52 guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms and is clearly evidenced in the Bill of Costs [Application Record
Tab.4 Exhibit C P 177-234] produced by Lockwood representing Law Society and Lawyer's
Professional Indemnity Company and Nelligan/Power.

25. The Applicants raised constitutional argument with regards to the section 140 Courts of
Justice Act, on different grounds: a general right o£ access to Justice that is implicit in the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and flows from section 1, the primacy of the
rule of law, Freedom of Association section 2(d); Everyone has the right to life, liberty and
security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereto except in accordance with the
principles of fundamental justice; everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable
search or seizure section 8; to be tried within a reasonable tune; the protection of minority
ethnic groups rights, and equality rights under s.15 of the Charter

26. For sometime, Courts have recognized that indemnity to the successful party is not the /
sole purpose, and in some cases not even the primary purpose, of a costs award. Orkin, The
Law of Costs, 2"° ed. (Aurora, Ont.: Canada Law Book, 1987(loose leaf updated to
November 2002,) at P2-24.2, has remarked that:

"The principle of indemnification, while paramount, is not the only consideration when court
is called on to make an order as to Costs; indeed, the principle has been called "outdated"
since other functions may be served by a costs order, for example to encourage settlement
to prevent frivolous or vexatious (sic) litigation and to discourage unnecessary steps."

27. "Another consideration relevant to the application of costs rules is access to Justice.
This factor is increased in importance as litigation over matters of Public interest has
become more common, especially since the advent of the Charter. In special cases, where
individual litigants of limited means seek to enforce their constitutional rights, courts often
exercise their discretion on costs so as to avoid the harshness that might result from
adherence to the traditional principles This helps to ensure that ordinary citizens have
access to the Justice system when they seek to resolve matters".

British Columbia (Minister of Forests) x Okanagan Indian Band /20031233
ALB. (4*) 577 at 590-591 S. CC

28. "Interim Costs: Concerns about access to Justice and the desirability of mitigating
severe inequality between litigants also feature prominantly in the rare cases where interim costs

740-10CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T10:13:00.000-07:00

are awarded An award of costs of this nature forestalls the danger that a meritorious legal
argument will be prevented from going forward merely because a party lacks the financial
resources to proceed"

"The Costs orders can be used in this way in a narrow class of erceptional cases was recognized
early on by the English courm In Jones v Carter (1742). 2 Atk400,26 E.R.642(Ch), the Lord
Chancellor found that `the poverty of the person will not allow her to carry on the cause, unless the
court will direct the defendant to pay something to the Plaintiff in the mean time". Invoking the
"entirely discretionary" equitable jurisdiction to order costs, he ordered costs_ to be Paid to the
Plaintiff "to empower her to eo on with the cause"(P.642)

British Columbia (Minister of Forests) v. Okanagan Indian Band [2003] 233
D.LR(0) 577 at 593-594 S.C.C.

29. Applicants Cross-Motion Record, confirming their impecuniousity was filed with
the Court but Nordheimer J. refused to accept the Cross-Motion record of
impecuniousity of the Applicants and hence should not order Costs.

30. The material filed by Anne Marshall, a paralegal clerk o f Nelligan/Power, as well as
Trevor McDonald is a recycled material, costs on a partial indemnity scale, in the amount of
$4,611.91 and on a substantial indemnity scale in the amount is $5,455.13 is totally
unjustified and unwarranted and should be denied. considering the Trial [97-CV-123515]
set against Nelligan/Power and their Law Partners is still pending .

31. The material filed for costs by Piazza Brooks on behalf of Talberts, who sent it to the
wrong address of the applicants, is based on adopting the written submissions of
Nelligan/Power and their costs on Partial indemnity basis for $3,387.27 and on substantial
indemnity basis for $4,568.56 is totally unjustified and should be denied, since the sale was
unlawful and made a million dollars profit .

32. The material filed by Eric Appotive of Hamilton/Appotive, who sent the material to the
Applicants to the wrong address, for costs by adopting the written submissions as well as
submissions for Bill of costs NELLIGAN/POWER,IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,343.30 ON PARTIAL

740-11CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T10:01:00.000-07:00

9

indemnity basis and $2,846_20 on a substantial indemnity basis should be denied as Peat
Marwick Thorne Inc were made as defendants by Counterclaim by the Court order of June
24, 1992 by Cunningham J., and have been noted in default far $65 Million in actions
49924/90 and 49925/90 and the assessment of damages is still pending.

33. The Applicants request that Mr. Justice Nordheimer not hear this matter and recuse
himself for obvious prejudice and order that Master hear this matter within 14 days.

34. The Applicants hereby request Costs on a solicitor and client basis based on the
criminal acts of the Respondents/Defendants set out in the Bill of Costs, Privacy
Commission information and the Forensic Accountant's Report

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THIS 17th DAY OF MAY 2005.

Reddy Rajagopat Chavali
Reddy %rishnaveni Chavali
Dr. Bane Chavali

For the Applican

740-12 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T09:44:00.000-07:00

MAY-30-2005 10:15 JUGDES ADMIN RM 334
416 327 5417

COURT FILE NO: 02-CV-240696CMI
DATE: 20050530

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: REDDY RAJAGOPAL CHAVALI and others v. THE LAW SOCMTY OF
ZIPPER CANADA and others

BEFORE: NORDHEDAER J.

COUNSEL: Reddy Rajagopal Chavali, Reddy Krishnaveni Chivali and Reddy
Venkatasubbarami Chavali in person

Trevor McDonald, for the respondents, The Law Society of Upper Canada,
Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company, Nelligan/Power and Royal Trust
Corporation of Canada

Rick Brooks, for the respondents, Samuel Talbert and Colette Talbert
Eric M. Appotive, for the respondent, KPMG Inc.

HEARD: Written submissions

ENDORSEMENT - COSTS

[1] On April 18, 2005, 1 dismissed the applicants' application, made in writing, for an order
granting them leave to proceed, pursuant to section 140 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O.
1990, c. C.43, with a motion to the Court of Appeal for Ontario for leave to set aside that court's
order dated December 16, 1998. 1 invited written submissions on the appropriate disposition of
the costs of the application. I have now received and reviewed those submissions.

[2] Each of the respondents seek their costs of the application on a substantial indemnity
basis. The respondents, The Law Society of Upper Canada, Lawyers' Professional Indemnity
Company, Nelligan/Power and Royal Trust Corporation of Canada, seek costs in the amount of
$5,455.13. The respondents, Samuel Talbert and Colette Talbot, seek costs in the amount of
$4,568.56. The respondent, KPMG, seeks costs in the amount of $2,846.20. Each of the
respondents havc also provided bills of costs calculated on a partial indemnity basis.

[3] The applicants say that they filed on the application what they characterize as new
evidence "proving the conspiracy of lawyers and Judges and the Ex-Attorney General of
Ontario". The applicants also submit that they are "victims of prima facie fraud, theft, violation
of their Constitutional Rights and abuse by the Officers of the Court and the State".They further submit that as a result of these matters they have been made impecunious. For all of these

740-13 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T09:24:00.000-07:00

reasons, the applicants submit that they should receive the costs of the application
notwithstanding that they were unsuccessful.

[4] I will first say that I do not accept the submissions of the applicants as to why they should
receive the costs of the application. They were unsuccessful in the application and I see no basis
for departing from the normal rule that costs follow the event. The respondents are therefore
entitled to their costs of the application.

(5] In terms of whether the costs should be awarded on a substantial indemnity basis, an
award of costs on the higher scale is justified where there has been reprehensible conduct by a
party in the proceeding which warrants sanction by the court - see Mortimer v. Cameron (1994),
17 O.R. (3d) 1 (C.A.). Costs on the substantial indemnity basis may also be awarded where a
party makes allegations of fraud or similar allegations going to the heart of a person`s integrity -
see Murano v. Bank of Montreal, (1995) O.J. No. 1434 (Gen. Div.). In addition, negative,
offensive and prejudicial comments about opposing counsel are also a basis for awarding costs
on the substantial indemnity scale - see Bakh v. Sun Media rroronto) Corp. (2003), 63 O.R
(3d) 51 (Master).

[6] The applicants have consistently made just those types of allegations not only against the
respondents (and others who are not parties to this litigation) but also against at least some of the
lawyers who are involved in this matter on behalf of the respondents. Indeed, they repeated just
such allegations in their costs submissions. For example, in their costs submissions, the
applicants refer to "uncontradicted evidence of fraud, judicial misconduct". They also refer to
one of the lawyers as having made "baseless, disparaging, scandalous and unproven statements
and submissions"Not only is none of this proven, these allegations also had very little to do
with the specific application that was at issue which was very much a procedural matter. This is
also not a case where, because the applicants are unreptesented, they might be forgiven for any
such transgressions because of unfamiliarity with the litigation process. As I noted in my
reasons, this application is just one step in the history of the applicants' litigation against these
respondents, and others, that dates back more than ten years. The applicants are quite familiar
with the rules regarding the proper conduct of litigation but they choose not to conduct
themselves in accordance with those rules. For all of these reasons, therefore, I conclude that the
respondents are entitled to their costs of the application on a substantial indemnity basis.

[7] While the applicants filed voluminous material on the application, the material filed by
the respondents was quite limited. The application itself was argued by way of written
submissions so there was no hearing at which the parties had to attend. This was a very efficient
way of dealing with the application. It meant that the amount of material that needed to be
prepared and the amount of time that needed to be spent was significantly reduced from what it
otherwise might have been. That efficiency should be reflected in the amount of costs that are
awarded and that reality may be seen, to some extent, in the relatively modest amounts that are
being sought for costs by each of the respondents.

(8] I do not quarrel with any of the rates being sought by the respondents or with the time
that they spent. Taking into account all of the other relevant factors, in the end result, I consider
the fair and reasonable amounts to be awarded for the costs to be:

740-14 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T08:49:00.000-07:00

MAY-30-2005 10:16 JUGDES ADMIN RM 334

416 32'r ~4-

3

The Law Society of Upper Canada and $5,000
others

Samuel and Colette, Talbert $4,500

KPMG $2,500

(9) The applicants shall therefore pay to the respondens their costs
of the application on a substantial indemnity basis fixed in the above
amounts, inclusive of disbursements and GST, within thirty days.

DATE MAY 30, 2005 NORDHEIMER J

740-15 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T08:13:00.000-07:00

LAWYERS-JUDGES-THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA AND OTHER DEFENDANTS AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO HAVE USED THEIR JUDICIAL AUTHORI'T'Y TO STOP THE CHAVALIES FROM HAVING ANY TRIAL OF THEIR CLAIM AGAINST THE LAW FIRM OF GOWLING STRATHY AND HENDERSON WHO WIT] -I OTHERS STOLE $57 MILLION DOLLARS OF THEIR PROPERTY IN OTTAWA.
THE CANADIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM IS "ON THE TAKE". THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO FRAUDULENTLY CONSPIRED WITH THE RESPONDENT DEFENDANTS TO STOP THE RIGHT OF THE CHAVALIES TO HAVE A FAIR TRIAL FOR 16 YEARS.

THE CHAVALIES ASKED THE ONTARIO PROVINCIAL POLICE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO AND THE ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA AND THE OTTAWA POLICE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF OTTAWA THE CAPITAL OF CANADA TO INVESTIGATE ALl_ "TIE FACTS OF THIS CASE THAT WERE ALL
GIVEN THE SAME FACTS AND THEY ALL REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE.
THEY ARE ALL "ON THE'IAKE" AS "TI IEY ARE NOT PROTECTING THE INTERESTS OF CANADIANS BUT ONLY THE INTERESTS OF CORRUPT GOVERNMENTS AND JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES

THE BILL OF COSTS THAT THE CHAVALIES WANTED TO PLACE BEFORE THE COURT OF APPEAL WHICH APPEAL WAS REFUSED BY JUDGE NORDHEIMER INVOLVED THE BILL OF COSTS THAT HAD NEVER BEEN BEFORE THE COURT OF APPEAL WITH REGARD TO SECTION 140 OF THE COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT.

THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF LAWYERS ORGANIZED SECRETLY INCLUDING LAWYERS FOR
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTRAIO,
(i) LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA
(2) LAWYER'S PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY,
(3) NELLIGAN/POWER
(4) GEORGE GATTY
(5) ROYAL 'TRUST CORPORATION OF CANADA
(6) PEAT MARWICK THORNE INC
(7) SAMUEL TALBERT AND COLETTE TALBERT
FOR THEIR 17 MONTH CAMPAIGN FOR SECTION 1 CONSENTS UNDER SECTION 140 OF THE COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT AGAINST CHAVALIS AT THE EXPENSE OF THE PUBLIC PURSE WITHOUT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL GIVING THE CHAVALIS THE RIGHT TO RESPOND TO THE APPLICATION BEFORE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. THE BILL OF COSTS FOR THIS WORK WAS SUBMITTED ONE YEAR AFTER THE MOTION BEFORE JUDGE CUMMINGS WHERE HE DECLARl.D MR AND MRS CHAVALI AND DR RAM CHAVALIE THEIR SON FRIVOLOUS AND VEXATIOUS WITHOUT DR RAM
BEING SERVED AS PROVED IN THE BILL OF COSTS . THE FOLLOWING LAWYERS WERE' INVOLVED IN THE CONSPIRACY TO DECLARE THE CHAVALIES FRIVOLOUS AND VEXATIOUS TO STOP ANY OF THE CHAVALIS TRIALS FROM PROCEEDING BECAUSE THE PROPERTY SUED FOR OF 57 MILLION DOLLARS PLUS DAMAGES NOW AMOUNTS TO ABOUT $200 MILLION AND THE CHAVALIES HAVE NEVER BEEN ALLOWED TO HAVE ANY TRIAL TO PROVE THE FRAUDULENT THEFT OF THEIR
OTTAWA PROPERTY. ALI OF TFIE FOLLOWING LAWYI:RS KNEW OR AUGHT TO HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE FRAUDULENT MORTGAGES ENTERED INTO BY GOWIJNG HENDERSON WITH LAURENTIAN BANK (PREVIOUSLY FIRST CITY BANK), GEORGE: GATY BEFORE THE TRUST MANAGIIMEN"I'
AGREEMENT WAS SIGNED BY THE CHAVAIJES AND CI.AUSES 7 AND 10 WERE TAKEN OUT OF THE AGREEMENT AND LEFT IN THE MORTGAGE APPLICATION. THIS AMOUNTS TO FRAUD. ALL DOCUMENT'S WERE PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAI.OF ONTARIO AND NEVER SERVED ON THE CHAVALIS AND THERE lS NOTHING: IN SEC.TION 140 OF THE COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT T'HAT
ALLOWS LAWYERS TO FILE DOCUMENTS WITIH THE ATTORNEY OF GENERAL OF CANADA TO PROVE A PERSON OR PERSONS ARE FRIVOLOUS AND VEXATIOUS TO OBTAIN A CONSENT PROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO..

(1)JERZY ADAMOVICZ IS A LAWYER FOR LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY A

740-16 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T04:45:00.000-07:00

DEFENDANT. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRADULENT CONSPI RACY ATPAGES 2,3,4,5 OF 'I'HE 131LL OF
COSTS.

2. KIM TWOBIG IS A LAWYER FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA ,-1 DEFENDANT; SEE
INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 2,3,4,017 THE 131 LL OF COSTS.

3. E. BUCCI IS A LAWYER FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO A DEFENDANT. SEE
INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 3, 4,OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

4. MICHEL LAPIERRE IS A LAWYER FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO A DEFENDANT. SEE
INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGE 3,4 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.of the bill of costs.

5. ELAINE ATKINSON IS A LAWYER FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO A DEFENDANT. SEE
INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 4,8,9,12-16,18- 20,22,37,38-40,42,53,54 OF THE
BILL OF COSTS. DISCUSSION WITH LAWYER LOCKWOOD AND ADVISING ON A SEPARATE ACTION
BETWEEN US AND MR MISHRA AT PAGE 14 OF THE BILL 01, COSTS.

6. BRENDA SPAULDING IS A LAWYER FOR LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY A
DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION. SEE NVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGE 5 OF
THE BILL OF COSTS.

7 DEBRA ROLPH IS A LAWYER FOR LAWEYERS PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY A
DEFENDANT N THIS ACTION. SEE INVOLVERMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY ATPAGE 7 OF
THE BILL OF COSTS.

8. LESTER LEE IS A LAWYER FOR LA\VYI:RS PROI,FSSIONAI. INDEIVINI'1'Y CO:tiiPr1N1- r\ DI I,l3NDANT IN THIS
ACTION. SEE INVOLVEMENT] N IXUI.I N'f CONSPIR;\Cl" A'f 1',~GE 31,52 OF TH1 1311-,1. 01• COSTS.

9. SUSAN DI GRAPPA IS A LAWYER FOR LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY A
DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAIJDIJLI~N"1' (:ONSJ'112ACY AT PAGES 40,41,42,
OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

10. ANN DESOUZA IS A LAWYER FOR LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY A
DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION.

11. LORNA SHELSON IS A LAWYER FOR LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY A
DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION. SEE INVOLVEMENT 1N FRAUDUL1-INT CONSPIRACY AT PAGE 39 OF
THE BILL OF COSTS.

12. MARK GEDDES A LAWYER FOR NELLIGAN POWER A DEPENDANT INT 1-IIS ACTION WHICH FIRM
ACTS FOR THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA AND LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY
COMPANY AND NELLIGAN POWER AND ROYAL. TRUST ALL D1~Fl;NDANTS IN THIS ACTION. SEE
INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSP RACY ATPAGES 51 AND 2 OlFTHE'BILL OF COSTS.

13. RUBLER IS A LAWYER FROM THE LAW FIRM OF BLAKE CASSE1 S THAT ACTS FOR THE LAW
SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA A DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT
CONSPIRACY AT PAGE 17 OF THE 131LL OF COSTS.

14. JOEL RICHLER 1S A LAWYER 1N "1'1-I1; FI RM 01, BLAKE CASSI LS WI-10 ACT FOR THE LAW SOCIETY
OF UPPER CANADA A DEFENDANT1N TT-11S ACTION. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT
CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 20,30,55 Ol' 'I'I-I1" BILL OF COSTS.

15. LISA FAVREAU OF THE LAW FIRM OF BLAKE_ CASSIAS A LAWYER FORTH E LAW SOCIETY OI'
UPPER CANADA A DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT
CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 34,39,40 OF THE 1311.1, 01, COSTS.

04/06/2005

740-17 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T04:27:00.000-07:00

16. JONATHAN FEDDER IS A LAWYER FOR THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADFA A DEFENDANT IN
THIS LAW SUIT. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGE 24 OF THE BILL OF
COSTS.
17. HEATHER WERRY IS A LAWYER FOR THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA A DEFENDANT IN
THIS ACTION. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 24,28,29 OF THE BILL OF
COSTS.
18. MR JOSEPH A LAWYER FOR THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE ,UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EXCESS
INSURERS TO NELLIGAN POWER. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGE 30 OF
THE BILL OF COSTS.
19. KAVINSKY AND COOK, BUFFALO NEW YORK U.S.A. THE LAW FIRM HIRED TO SERVE DR RAM CHAVALI
IN BOSTON USA WHICH WAS NEVER INTENDED TO TAKE PLACE SO HE WOULD HAVE 45 DAYS TO
REPLY AND TRIAL COMMENCED BY THE PLAINTIFFS WOULD THEN BE FINISHED. YET MADE DR RAM TO
LOOK LIKE HE WAS SERVED KNOWING HE HAD NEVER BEEN SERVED.
20. KAREN ZYPCHEN A LAWYER WITH FRASER BEATTY A LAW FIRM ACTING FOR THE LAW SOCIETY
OF UPPER CANADA A DEFENDANT IN IN THIS ACTION AND GEORGE GATY A DEFENDANT. SEE
INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 27,28,31,32,33,34,35,40,46 TO 49 OF THE BILL
OF COSTS.

21. JOHN CROUCHMAN A LAWYER ACTING FOR THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA A ,
DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION AND ARTHUR AULT A DEFENDANT AND GOWLING STRATHY AND
HENDERSON A DEFENDANT. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 4,5,9, 18,
22, 23, 25-27, 42 53, 55 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

22. BARRY GARLAND A LAWYER WITH GOLDBERG SH1NDER ACTING FOR DEFENDANTS GEORGE
GATY AND THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT
CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 6,1,10,16,17-,32,34, 39,44, 53, OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

23. GORD CAMERON A LAWYER WITI I BLAKE CASSELS ACTING FOR THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER
CANADA A DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION AND LAURENTIAN BANK. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT
CONSPIRACY AT PAGE 39 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

24. ALLAN O'BRIEN A PARTNER IN THE LAW FIRM OF NELLIGAN POWER A DEFENDANT 1N THIS
ACTION AND ACTING FOR THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA AND THE ROYAL TRUST COMPANY
DEFENDANTS IN THIS ACTION AND NOW ACTING FOR ALL THE DEFENDANTS IN THIS ACTION AND
ALL THE COUNSEL AND JUDGE MACPHERSON AND THEIR COUNSEL HEREIN.. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN
FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 7, 52, 53 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

25. RODER1Ch BROOKS A PARTNER IN THE LAW FIRM OF PIAZZA BROOKS DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION AND ACTING FOR DEFENDANTS AND SAMUEL TALBERT AND COLLETTE TALBERT. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 5 to 9, 12, 13,
16, 17, 19, 20, 24, 31, 39-42, 44, 45, 53, 55 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

26. ERIC APPOTIVE A PARTNER IN THE LAW FIRM OF HAMILTON-APPOTIVE A DEFENDANT IN THIS
ACTION AND ACTING FOR LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA AND PEAT MARWICK AND THORNE. SEE
INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PACES 4, 9, 10, 12, 13, 24, 37, 39,41, 42,48, 53 to 55 OFTHE BLL OF COSTS.

27. ABE FIENSTIEN A LAWYER IN THE LAW FIRM OF SOLOWAY WRIGHT AND A BENCHER OF THE
LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA A DEFENDANT IN THIS LAW SUIT AND A DEFENDANT IN
ANOTHER ACTION WHERE HE IS ACTING FOR HIMSELF. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT
CONSPIRACY AT PAGE 37 OF THE BILL OF COSTS..

04/06/2005

740-18 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI FAMILY $57 MILLION.

2005-06-04T04:06:00.000-07:00

28 KEN RADNOFF A PARTNER IN THE LAW FIRM OF RADNOFF PEARL ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE LAW
SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA AND REPRESENTINMG SOLOWAY WRIGHT IN A SEPARATE ACTION. SEE
INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 39,40 OF THE BILL OF COSTS..

29. ANDRE BLUTEAU IS A LAWYER FOR HIMSELF IN A SEPERATE ACTION. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN
FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGE 32 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

30. FRANK G. TANNER A DEFENDANT IN A SEPARATE ACTION REPRESENTED BY NELLIGAN POWER.

31. MELVYN SOLOMON A PARTNER IN THE LAW FIRM OF SOLOMON ROTHBART GOODMAN A
DEFENDANT IN A SEPARATE ACTION REPRESENTED BY BLAKE CASSELS ACTING FOR THE LAW
SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGES 17, 20,35.
37,38 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

32 STEPHAN HORWITZ A LAWYER ACTING FOR KENNY NG A DEFENDANT IN ANOTHER ACTION.

33 MR NEISTIEN A LAWYER WITH HAMILTON APPOTIVE SEE 26 ABOVE.

34 JAMES KEALY SEE PAGE 24 0F BILL OF COSTS.

35 TOM LOCKWOOD A PARTNER OF LOCKWOOD & ASSOCIATES ACTING FOR ALL 7 DEFENDANTS
WITH NELLIGAN POWER SEE PAGES I TO 56 SEE INVOLVEMENT 1N FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT
PAGES 1 TO 56 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

36 KEN JONES WITH LOCKWOOD AND ASSOCIATES AS IN 35 ABOVE.

37 RICARDO CODINA WITH LOCKWOOD AND ASSOCIATES AS IN 35 ABOVE.

38 J.B. WITH LOCKWOOD & ASSOCIATES AS IN 35 ABOVE.

39 A.G. WITH LOCKWOOD & ASSOCIATES AS 1N 35 ABOVE.

40 STU WITH LOCKWOOD AND ASSOCIATES AS 1N 35 ABOVE.

41 SOLOWAY WRIGHT SEE 31 ABOVE.SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUD PAGES 37,40,49.

42 NIKOLOUS WOLF- A DISBARRED LAWYER A CO-DEFENDANT IN THE MOTION UNDER SECTION
140 OF THE COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT BEFORE JUDGE CUMMINGS AND HE MADE A DEAL WITH THE
DEFENDANTS LAWYERS NOT TO ARGUE ON OUR BEHALF BEFORE JUDGE CUMMINGS EVEN
THOUGH HE WAS OUR LAWYER WHO PREPARED ALL OF OUR DOCUMENTS FOR THE MOTION
BEFORE JUDGE CUMMINGS EVEN THOUGH HE CONSPIRED FOR 17 MONTHS WITH THE 44 LAWYERS
AND JUDGE MCPHERSON TO OBTAIN THE CONSENT FROM THE ATTORNEY GENEIZAL OF ONTARIO
AS SHOWN IN THE BILL Oh COSTS. SEE HIS INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT
PAGES 19,20,21,25,26,29,38 TO 45,48 TO 54, AND 56 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.
THE BILL OF COSTS IS AN ADMISSION OF THE FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AS IT WAS PREPARED
FOR THE 44 LAWYERS AND JUDGE MACPHERSON AND DELIVERED TO US.

43 JOHN NELLIGAN A PARTNER WITH NELLIGAN POWER THAT ACTED FOR ALL 7 DEFENDANTS IN
THE MOTION BEFORE JUDGE NORDHEIMER AND FOR THE 44 LAWYERS AND JUDGE MACPHERSON
WHO CONSPIRED WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO TO GRANT THE CONSENT TO
HAVE US DECLARED FRIVOLOUS AND VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS FOR SUEING TO GET OUR 57 MILLION
DOLLARS WORTH OF PROPERTY BACK. SEE INVOLVEMENT IN FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY AT PAGE
15 OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

44 NELLIGAN POWER SEE 43 ABOVE.

740-19 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT THEFT OF CHAVALI $57 MILLION

2005-06-04T03:45:00.000-07:00

45 MR JUSTICE MACPHERSON CO-ORDINATED THE APPOINTMENT TO HAVE MR JUST1CE
CUMMINGS HEAR THE SECTION 140 COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT MOTION TO DECLARE US FRIVOLOUS
AND VEXATIOUS AND HAD CONFERENCES WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO AND LAW
SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA TO MAKE SURE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL GRANTED THE
FRAUDULENT CONSENT AS SHOWN ON PAGES 6,7,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21, OF THE BILL OF COSTS.

THE EVIDENCE IS CLEAR THAT THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF CANADA AND ONTARIO IS CORRUPT
FROM THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA DOWN. IN 16 YEARS THE CHAVALIES HAVE NOT BEEN
ALLOWED TO HAVE A TRIAL TO PROVE THIER CLAIMS.

HOW MANY MORE CANADIANS HAVE BEEN DEFRAUDED OUT OF THEIR ASSETS AND
HOMES BY THESE FRAUDULENT CONSPIRATORS.

737 ON THE TAKE--CANADIAN POLITICAL THEFT

2005-05-26T01:37:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS MAY.27 TO 29,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA,COMMENT:http://thevoiceless.blogspot.con FAX(613)235-5573
ONTARIO K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION
ON THE TAKE TALK: SEE- http //politheft.blogspot.com
18 YEARS AGO ONE OF THE FIRST CASES I HAD WAS A PERSON CAME
INTO MY OFFICE AND TOLD ME HE HAD AN AGREEMENT WITH A QUEBEC
ENGINEERING FIRM TO DO WORK IN BANGLADESH UNDER A GOVERNMENT
CONTRACT WITH CIDA. HE WAS TO GET SO MUCH A DAY. THE FIRM HAD
REQUESTED THAT HE PAY THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH THE FIRM 20% OF
HIS WAGES. I CALLED THE FIRM AND WAS TOLD IT WAS FOR CIVIL
SERVANTS AND POLITICIANS AS THEY WERE RON THE TAKE". IT TURNED
OUT THAT THE FIRM HAD AN AGREEMENT WITH CIDA AND THE HIGH
OFFICIAL IN CIDA PREPARED THE CONTRACT AND HAD THE FIRM SIGN
THE CONTRACT AND THE CIDA OFFICIAL HAD IT SIGNED BY CIDA
OFFICIALS "ON THE TAKE". I DOCUMENTED ALL EVIDENCE AND PREPARED
AN AFFIDAVIT AND I SIGNED IT BEFORE A COMMISSIONER FOR TAKING
AFFIDAVITS UNDER OATH. I SENT ONE COPY TO THE MINISTER OF CIDA
AND ONE COPY TO THE RCMP. AFTER SEVERAL WEEKS I WAS TOLD THE
CIDA OFFICIAL WAS PUT ON PAID LEAVE FOR A YEAR. THE RCMP
INVESTIGATED FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND I WAS TOLD THEY HAD GONE

TO QUEBEC AND THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO LAY CRIMINAL
CHARGES. A JOKE. THE RCMP WAS SON THE TAKE" TO COVER UP THE
CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES.
STEVIE CAMERON WROTE A BOOK CALLED "ON THE TAKE"
CRIME CORRUPTION AND GREED IN THE MULRONEY YEARS.
THE RCMP AGAIN LAYED NO CHARGES WITH REGARD TO ALL THE EVIDENCE
OF CRIME SET OUT IN THE BOOK. THE RCMP AGAIN WAS "ON THE TAKE"
LOOKING AFTER THE CRIMINAL INTERESTS OF THE CONSERVATIVE
GOVERNMENT.
THE GOMERY INQUIRY IS DETAILING THE
CRIME, CORRUPTION AND GREED IN THE CHRETIEN YEARS
AND AFTER 3 YEARS OF INVESTIGATION THE RCMP WERE FOUND TO BE
"ON THE TAKE" FOR 1.7 MILLION & AGAIN HAVE ONLY LAID
4 CRIMINAL CHARGES FOR THE THEFT OF 43 MILLION+- OF TAXPAYER MONEY. JUDGE GOMERY IS INVESTIGATION THE DISBURSEMENT OF 355 MILLION
OF TAX PAYERS MONEY THAT WAS USED TO "BUY VOTES" IN QUEBEC TO STOP QUEBEC FROM BECOMING A NATION. EVERYONE INVOLVED WAS "ON THE TAKE" INCLUDING PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN AND HIS CABINET AND CIVIL SERVANTS
AS WELL AS THE PREMIER OF QUEBEC AND HIS CABINET AND CIVIL SERVANTS
AND ADVERTISING AGENCIES AND GOVENMENT CORPORATIONS LIKE VIA
RAIL AND THE POST OFFICE ETC. NO CHARGES LAID.
THE COMMISSIONER OF THE RCMP IS STILL "ON THE TAKE".
THE GOMERY INQUIRY IS ALSO DETAILING THE CONTINUING CRIME, CORRUPTION AND GREED IN THE PRIME MINISTER PAUL MARTIN YEARS.
PAUL MARTIN WAS MINISTER OF FINANCE IN THE CHRETIEN GOVERNMENT
AND HAD TO KNOW WHERE THE 355 MILLION WAS GOING.
THE AUDITOR GENERAL HAS NOW SAID SHE IS INVESTIGATING
ANOTHER $800 MILLION IN CONTRACTS WHERE SHE BELIEVES
MORE POLITICIANS AND CIVIL SERVANTS AND CORPORATIONS
HAVE BEEN "ON THE TAKE".
THE PRIME MINISTER CONTROLS THE COURTS AND THE RCMP THROUGH
THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE SO NO ONE GOES TO JAIL.
THE PERFECT CRIME.
PRIME MINISTER PAUL MARTIN IS NOW BRIBING THE CANADIAN PUBLIC
WITH 22 BILLION OF THEIR TAX MONEY TO BUY THEIR VOTES
TO KEEP THE PRIME MINISTERS AND CIVIL SERVANTS OUT OF JAIL
AND SO THEY CAN KEEP ON STEALING TAXPAYERS MONEY.
I SHALL EXPECT AN AUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF
THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA INCLUDING OFFSHORE MONEY
AND THE SAME FROM ALL GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD.
GOVERNMENTS ARE "ON THE TAKE"
CITIZENS AROUND THE WORLD SUFFER AS A RESULT.
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO : 192 HEADS OF NATIONS LETTER NO: 737 E-MAIL ON

BLOG 728 POLITICAL TAX THEFT TALK

2005-05-10T03:27:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS APRIL 25 TO 28,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA,COMMENT:http://tnevoiceless.blogspot.com FAX(613)235-5573
ONTARIO K2P OY5 http:iiwww.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION
FEDERAL BRIBERY AND KICKBACK TALK:INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT SPONSORSHIP PAGE(31 CHEQUES PER PAGE+-)9-10-13-29-30-
31-32-33-34-35-3637-39-41-44-47-48-49-50-51-52-PLUS 54-55-56-61-
63-64-65-66-6870-82-83-84-86-88-94---) PATRICIA FIELD-BRIAN
KOSHUL-LOUISE CARPENTER-JASMINE ANTONICK-LISON LESCARBEAU-LUCIE
GAGNON-MICHELLE HUNT-AMELIE CHRETIEN-CELINE BEAUDET-DALERIE
DEFORGE-DANIELLE ARMANGAUD-JOANNE WARD JARERETT-JODEY MICHAEL
DEROUIN-KELSIE MATHESON-LISA VALADE DE MELD-PIERRE CREMER
50,000.00-MAURICE AUDET-WILLIAM HART-SARAH HUBBARD-LAUREN A
WALKER-MADELEINE DUFORD-MICHELINE DANDURAND PIERRE LEMIEUX-
CUMMING MITCHELL-LAURA EGGERTON-JORRY JOHNSTON-BRIAN KOSHUL-
MICHEL BESETTE-DAVID A L LAUER-AMELIE CROSON-ISABELLA GRIGOROFF-
ANNA MARIE WEILLER-BENOIT HUBERT-BOB LYLECATHY FINN-CHARLOTTE
CAMPION-COLLEEN BILODEAU- DAVID A L LAUER-EL MOSTAFA FALDI-
GILLES PELLETIER-HAVI ECHENBERG- HELENE M DREYFUS-JACQUELINE
SCHIMPF-JASMINE ANTONICK-JEAN GUY COLLETTE-JEAN PIERRE LEBLANC-
KIM HERPER-GERLINE GINGRAS-LORI LANCE-LUCIE GAGNON-MATHURIN
GAGBEGNON-MICHEL DESROSIERS-MIKAELLE COUILLARD-NADIELE ST PIERRE-
NICOLE CHENEVERT MIQUELO-NINA DELL- PAUL CROFT-PIERRE CREMER-
ROSALIE MCGRATH- RUSSELL W LAPOINTE-S LEILAH VAYID-GUYLINE
MALTAIS- SYLVIE GAUTHIER-DR MARCIA E MCCOY-FRANCIS DE ST HILAIRE,
HONG BIN YU-YOHONG-JEAN GUY COLLETTE -MICHAEL BLOCK-MICHEL
COPTE-MONIQUE LEBLANC-NADIELE ST PIERRE- PAUL SCHLIEPER-TEPHANIE
ST PIERRE-SVETLANA GRIKIT-MADELEINE DUFORD-DAVID HERWOOD-DENIS
DUBE-DENISE DUMAIS-MARCEL BUJOLD- HAROLD SEIDEMANN-JOEL
GIROUARD-LORI L LANCE-TERRY S HENDERON- WILLIAM HART-CLAIRE
DORION-COLLEEN BILODEAU-OPHIE LATULIPPE-DENIE DUMAIS-ANNE
CATHERINE NASH-ISABELLA MARCINEK RENAUD FOSTER- MADELEINE
DUFORD-HAROLD SEIDEMANN-GERALD ROBERTSON-TERRANCE EDWARD FIRMAN.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HIRED THE INDIVIDUALS THROUGH THESE
EMPLOYMENT SERVICES WHO KICKED BACK TO THE LIBERALS.ACCES
CORPORATE TECH P 604 TO 606/603 TO 606 ACTION PERSONNEL P 607
TO 609 ADECCO EMPLOYMENT SERVICES LTD PAGE 132 AIM PERSONNEL
SERVICE INC PAGE 132-133 ALTIS HUMAN RESOURCES PAGE 142-615
ANJURA TECHNOLOGY CORP PAGE 147-APS ANTIAN PROFESIONAL SERVICES
INC P-152 TO 157-ARTEMP PERSONNEL SERVICES INC P159 TO 161-
631 TO 633- 631 TO 632 ATHENA CONSULTING OUTAUAIS P163-164 AZUR
HUMAN RESOURCE P 634-635 BANK OF MONTREAL 166 TO 173-P635 TO
676- BARBARA PERSONNEL INC 173 TO 182-P 676 TO 684-P687 TO 725
BELL CANADA PAGE 188 TO 206 CALIAN P 744-745 C A PARADIS INC
P222 C.L.A. PERSONNEL P222 TO 224 C G I INFORMATION SYS P243
TO 244 CREATEC P266-267-DARE PERONNEL INC P272 TO 274 EXCEL
HUMAN RESOURCES 296 TO 303 KELLY SERVICES CANADA LTD P374 LORI
L. LANCE P391-392 MACDONALD & BRISSON P395 MANPOWER TEMPORARY
SERVICE P 397 MADELEINE DUFORD P396 397 MAXSYS P 401 MICHELINE
DANDURAND P 416 MISS HALLS PERSONNEL P 423 TO 425 PORTAGE
PERSONNEL P 451 PROLOGIC SYSTEMS P 457 QUANTUM MANAGEMENT P
469 TO 475 QUNARA P477-478 THE ASSOCIATES GROUP OF COMPANIES
P 547 TO 550 1019837 ONTARIO INC P 590-592 -3178935 CANADA INC
P 597 -802732 ONTARIO INC P600 TO 602 THESE TEMPORARY HELP
ORGANIZATIONS KICKED BACK TO THE LIBERAL PARTY FOR OBTAINING
WORK FROM THE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT. WHY DID NOT THE LIBERAL PARTY
HIRE ITS OWN EMPLOYEES WITH ITS STOLEN MONEY?
THESE CRIMINALS DRAGGED THE POOR INTO ITS CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK T0: 192 HEADS OF NATIONS.LETTER NO:728 E-MAIL ON

BLOG 727 CANADIAN POLITICAL TAX THIEVES

2005-05-10T02:56:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS APRIL 22 TO 24,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA, ONTARIO FAX(613) 235-5573
K2P OY5 http:iiwww.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION TYPE LETTER INTO BLDG. THANKS.
CANADIAN PERVERT PARLIAMENT TALK:
PERVERT: DEFN:
(1) TO TURN AWAY FROM THE RIGHT COURSE
(2) TO LEAD ASTRAY MORALLY
(3) TO LEAD INTO FALSE JUDGEMENT
(4) TO TURN INTO AN IMPROPER USE
(5) TO CHANGE TO WHAT IS UNNATURAL OR ABNORMAL.
(6) ONE WHO PRACTICES SEXUAL PERVERSION
(7) ONE WHO HAS BEEN PERVERTED
(8) SEDUCE
(9) CORRUPT
(10) DEMORALIZE.

PARLIAMENT STOP PERVERTING THE CANADIAN PEOPLE.
THE LIBERAL PERVERT PARLIAMENT OF CANADA HAS SAME SEX
LEGISLATION TO MAKE IT LEGAL FOR MALE OR FEMALE PERVERTS TO
GET MARRIED SO MALE PERVERTS CAN BUM FUCK EACH OTHER AND COCK
SUCK EACH OTHER AND FEMALE PERVERTS CAN MASTERBATE EACH OTHER
LEGALLY.
THE CONSERVATIVES TRIED TO PASS AN AMENDMENT TO KILL THE
PERVERT BILL. 164 PERVERTS VOTED AGAINST' THE AMENDMENT AND 132
MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT VOTED FOR THE AMENDMENT. EVERYONE HAD

A FREE VOTE EXCEPT THE 40 MEMBERS OF PERVERT PRIME MINISTER
MARTINS CABINET. THE PERVERT NDP VOTED AGAINST THE AMENDMENT
WITH THE LIBERAL PERVERTS. THE PERVERT BLOC QUEBECOIS VOTED
AGAINST THE AMENDMENT WITH THE PERVERT LIBERALS. IT NOW GOES
FOR A FINAL VOTE. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
WANT TO LEGALIZE PERVERSION BECAUSE THEY HAVE OVER 90,000 CIVIL
PERVERT ACTIONS AGAINST THEM AND THEY WANT TO LEGALIZE THE
PERVERSION OF CHILDREN THAT HAS BEEN PERFORMED BY THE CHRISTIANS
AND FEDERAL & PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS OF CANADA BY THE MINISTERS
OF PROVINCIAL EDUCATION UNDER THE TRAINING SCHOOLS ACTS SET
OUT ON MY ABOVE WEB SITE UNDER CATHOLIC PERVERT EMPIRE. IF THIS
PERVERT LEGISLATION PASSES HOW MANY MORE PERVERT ACTS WILL BE
PASSED. THE ROMANS LEGALIZED PERVERSION OF CHILDREN AND THIS
ACT LEGALIZES PERVERSION OF CHILDREN.
JOSEPH JOSEPH WAS PERVERTED BY THE CATHOLIC PERVERTS IN ALFRED
AND IS ONE OF THE 90,000 CASES AND HE WANTS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
CEMETARY IN ALFRED DIGUP AS 7 CHILDREN TOLD THE ONTARIO PROVINCIAL
POLICE THAT 7 CHILDREN HAD BEEN MURDERED IN ALFRED BY THE PERVERTS
TO COVER UP THERE CRIMES. PREMIER HARRIS REFUSED TO DIG UP THE GRAVES
TO PROTECT HIS PARTNERS THE PERVERT CATHOLICS AS THEY BUM FUCKED
CHILDREN IN THE SCHOOLS SINCE 1867.
ALL RIGHTS OF CHILDREN ARE TAKEN AWAY IF THIS LEGISLATION
IS PASSED SO THE PERVERTS CAN BUM FUCK AND MASTERBATE CHILDREN
IN THERE HOUSES AND LESBIANS CAN MASTERBATE CHILDREN IN THEIR
HOUSES LEGALLY. CHILDREN CAN BE THEN ENTER THE WORLD OF
PORNOGRAPHY ON THE INTERNET LEGALLY. WHEN IS BUM FUCKING A
PERVERTS INTESTINES SEX. WHAT KIND OF CHILD DO YOU GET FROM
PENETRATING ASS HOLES OF PERVERTS. PIERRE TRUDEAU WAS A PERVERT
AND THIS IS HIS PERVERT LEGACY/ JEAN CHRETIENS PERVERT LEGACY
/BRIAN MULRONEYS PERVERT LEGACY/ PAUL MARTINS PERVERT LEGACY.
CANADIANS DO NOT WANT A PERVERT CONSTITUTION.
CANADIANS DO NOT WANT PERVERTS GOVERNING THEM.
CANADIANS DO NOT WANT PERVERT CIVIL SERVANTS
BEING PREFERRED BY PERVERT GOVERNMENTS FEDERALLY OR PROVINCIALLY.
BRING ALL THE LEGISLATION AGAINST PERVERTS BACK INTO THE CRIMINAL
CODE THAT PERVERT TRUDEAU TOOK OUT.
PROTECT YOUR CHILDREN FROM PERVERTS IN THE NEXT ELECTION BY
VOTING AGAINST THE LIBERALS, NDP, AND BLOC QUEBECOISE.
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK T0:192 HEAD 0F NATIONS. LETTER NO:727 E-MAIL ON

BLOG 727 CANADIAN POLITICAL TAX THIEVES

2005-05-10T02:41:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS APRIL 11 TO 14,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA, ONTARIO FAX(613) 235-5573
K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca

DEAR HEAD OF NATION. TYPE LETTER INTO BLOC AND CHATROOM. THANKS.
STEALING-TAXES-TALK:IN/1995 QUEBEC,A PROVINCE OF CANADA WANTED
TO SEPARATE. A REFERENDUM WAS HELD IN QUEBEC & THE PEOPLE VOTED
NOT TO SEPARATE BUT THE VOTE WAS CLOSE. ANOTHER REFERENDUM WAS
CONTEMPLATED.PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN & HIS CABINET WHICH INCLUDED
FINANCE MINISTER PAUL MARTIN NOW PRIME MINISTER ORDERED THE
TREASURY BOARD TO RELEASE $250 MILLION DOLLARS TO BRIBE
QUEBECKERS.ALL/MONEY/HAS/TO/BE/APPROVED/BY/PARLIAMENT/BUT/NO
APPROVAL FOR THE $250 MILLION WHICH WAS STOLEN BY THE PRIME
MINISTER & CABINET & FINANCE MINISTER PAUL MARTIN & THEY ARE
PERSONALLY LIABLE ALONG WITH THE OTHERS THAT OBTAINED THE MONEY.
THE/MONEY/WAS USED FOR VOTE/BUYING-BRIBERY-WHICH-NO-GOVERNMENT
-HAS-THE-AUTHORITY-TO-USE-TAX-MONEY-FOR.UNDER/THE/FREEDOM/OF
INFORMATION ACT I OBTAINED/3607-PAGES-SHOWING-THE-DATE-INVOICE-
NUMBER-NAME-OF-RECIPIENT& AMOUNT DISBURSED. 31-CHEQUES-PER-PAGE.
TOTAL-111-THOUSAND-CHEQUES.THE MONEY-WAS STOLEN. PRIME MINISTER
PAUL MARTIN PUT-HIS SHARES IN CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES
INTO/HIS/SONS/NAMES/TO/AVOID/LOSING/THE/COMPANY/BY/SIEZURE/OF
SHARES IF JUDGEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CANADIAN PEOPLE WAS OBTAINED
AGAINST HIM. THE RCMP-HAVE CHARGED LESS THAN 10 PEOPLE FOR THE
THEFT OF THE $250 MILLION. NOW PARLIAMENT IS BRINGING LEGAL
ACTION TO GET BACK-THE MONEY THAT WAS STOLEN BY GROUPE EVEREST
$2.1 MILLION, COMMUNICATIONS COFFIN $1.9 MILLION. LA FLEUR
COMMUNICATIONS $1.1 MILLION, CIVIL SERVANT CHUCK GUITE & PIERRE
TREMBLAT (SINCE DECEASED) 17.8 MILLION AND GROUP ACTION MARKETING
AND LE GROUPE POLYGONE EDITEURS INC FROM 1996 TO 2001
TOTAL-41-MILLION.PRIME-MINISTERS-CHRETIEN-&-MARTIN-&-THEIR
CABINETS-HAVE-NOT-BEEN-SUED-FOR-$250-MILLION.MY-FREEDOM-OF-INFORM
ATION- INVOICES-SHOW-THE-FOLLOWING.THE-PAGE-FIRST-THEN-DOLLARS-IN
-THOUSANDS-&-THEN-TOTAL.SOME-INVOICE-NUMBERS-WERE-PAID--2-OR-MORE
-TIMES-FOR-THE-SAME-INVOICE.(1)PUBLICITY-MARTIN-34311-19:34320-52
34322-110:34611-173-TOTAL:$354,000:-IS-THIS-PRIME-MINISTER-
MARTINS-ORGANIZATION?(2)GROUP-ACTION-MARKETING-3475-16,CONTRACT/
NO/EN/771-7-0073/1997/1998/4/CHEQUES/ON/JULY17/97/4/CHEQUES/ON/
SEPT2/97/8/CHEQUES/FOR/$1,777,000.00-EACH-INVOICE-NOs:33223:33328
:INVOICED/TWICE:PAID/8/TIMES:WHO-APPROVED-THE-CHEQUES/???/DID-
THEY- GO-INTO-OFFSHORE-BANK/ACCOUNTS?34763,597-INCLUDES-2-CHEQUES
-FOR-$122,624.22-&-2-CHEQUES-FOR-$11,200.00.3478-1,098:3479-1,062
:3480-43.TOTAL:$22MILLION.(3)GOSSELIN-COMMUNICATIONS-21-MILLION(4
GROUPACTION:3475-1,732:3495-196:3497-896:3535-973:3537-210:3545-
47:3553-120:3569-602:3570-273-2-CHEQUES-FOR-$4,665.20:-3571-49:
3590-2,592:3594-245:3595-54:3596-624-2-CHEQUES-FOR-$11,984.00:359
8-154:3599-205:3601-240-TOTAL-$9MILLION+-.(5)VICKERS-&-BENSON-ADV
ERTISING-3664-3,209-2-CHEQUES-FOR-$802,500.00-OVERPAYED:3600-278:
3601-231:3602-212:TOTAL$3-MILLION+-(6)GROUP-EVEREST-$16-MILLION+-
(7)GOSSELIN-COMMUNICATIONS:$28MILLION+-(8)GROUPE-ACTION-GOSSELIN:
16MILLION+-:(9)CANADA-COMMUNICATIONS-GROUP:6-MILLION+-:(10)LA-FLE
UR-COMMUNICATION-30MILLION+-(11)COMMUNICATIONS-COFFIN-PAGES-3340-
TO-3605:5MILLION+-(12)COMPASS-COMMUNICATIONS-3341-TO-3605-14-MILL
ION.(13)-HOUSE-OF-COMMONS-3363-154-(14)SENATE-3365-38-(15)JUSTICE
-3363-121-(16)STATITICS-CANADA-3367-2-MILLION+-GRAND-TOTAL$166
MILLION-946-THOUSAND+-NOT-41-MILLION-ARE-THE-RCMP-&-LAW-SUIT-A-
JOKE-AFTER-3-YEARS-INVESTIGATION?-SEE-GLOBE-&-MAIL-MAR-12/05/A4:
OTTAWA-CITIZEN-MAR/16/05/1:
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO:192 NATIONS.LETTER NO:724 E=MAIL ON

BLOG 724 STEALING TAXES TALK

2005-05-10T02:26:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS MARCH 25 TO 27,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA, ONTARIO FAX(613) 235-5573
K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION TYPE LETTER INTO A BLOC AND CHATROOM.THANKS.
FEDERAL BRIBERY OF MEDIA AND KICKBACK TALK:
THE FEDERAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT BANK
BAILED OUT PRIME MINISTER JEAN CHRETIENS
INVESTMENT IN A GOLF COURSE IN HIS HOME TOWN
BY TAKING A MORTGAGE FROM THE BAD RISK MAN WHO BOUGHT FROM HIM.
I REQUESTED FROM THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
TO ADVISE ME IF ANY OF THE 250 MILLION
SPONSORSHIP MONEY STOLEN WAS DISBURSED
TO THE FEDERAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT BANK.
WITHOUT PARLIAMENTARY APPROVAL
NO MONEY CAN BE DISBURSED TO THE BANK.
I RECIEVED THE FOLLOWING REPORT OF FUNDS DISBURSED
TO THE FEDERAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT BANK:
(1) 1999/2000 OTHER BUSINESS
3/31/2000 $75,000.00--
3/21/2000 $50,000.00
(2) 2002/2003 ADVERTISING SERVICE
2/21/2003 $700,000.00
(3) COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
3/22/2002 $700,000.00.
WAS-THE SUM OF $1,525,000.00 PAID TO THE BANK
TO KEEP A BLACKMAILER QUIET? ETC.
WHO DID THE FEDERAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT BANK
SEND THE MONEY TO?
WHOSE OFFSHORE BANK ACCOUNT?
WHO APPROVED THE DISBURSEMENT OF THE FUNDS
TO THE FEDERAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT BANK?
IS THE FEDERAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT BANK
AN OFFSHORE BANK FOR THE GOVERNMENT?
JUDGE GOMERY SUMMON THE PRESIDENT(S) OF THE BANK
WHEN THESE TRANSFERS TOOK PLACE.
IS THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA A MAFIA ORGANIZATION
SYPHONING MONEY INTO OFFSHORE BANKS
IN THE TURKS AND CACOS ISLANDS
AND SWITZERLAND ETC FOR CIVIL SERVANTS
AND PRIME MINISTERS AND POLITICIANS.
CHARGE PRIME MINISTER JEAN CHRETIEN
AND PRIME MINISTER PAUL MARTIN
AS FINANCE MINISTER AT THE TIME
WITH TREASON/THEFT FOR
ALLOWING THE TRANSFER OF THESE FUNDS
WITHOUT PARLIAMENTARY APPROVAL.
I SHALL EXPECT THE CROOKED TAX ACT OF CANADA TO BE ABOLISHED
AND REPLACED BY A FLAT TAX WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW THEFT.
THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA IS 500 BILLION IN DEBT
AS A RESULT OF THE FUNDS BEING STOLEN
BY CIVIL SERVANTS AND THE GOVERNMENT.
CITIZENS DO YOU KNOW
IN WHICH OFFSHORE BANK YOUR TAX MONEY IS IN?
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO: 191 HEADS OF NATIONS.LETTER NO:717 E-MAIL ON.

BLOG 716 CANADIAN TAX THIEVES

2005-05-10T02:05:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS MARCH 21 TO 24,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA, ONTARIO FAX(613) 235-5573
K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION TYPE LETTER INTO BLDG AND CHATROOM.THANKS.
FEDERAL BRIBERY OF MEDIA AND KICKBACK TALK: FOLLOW THE MONEY
AND FIND IT IN OFFSHORE BANKS (ANY BANK THAT HAS SECRET ACCOUNTS)
IN CANADA/THE TURKS & CACOS ISLANDS/SWITZERLAND. SEE ABOVE WEB
PAGE TYPE IN SWISS BANKS. THE FOLLOWING CORPORATIONS ARE MORE
TAX THIEVES & THEY MAKE THEMSELVES LOOK CHRISTIAN BUT THEY ARE
CROOKS. ST JOSEPH PRINT GROUP INC:JOHN GAGLIANO PRES, MURRAY
SKINNER VISE PRES, ANDRE AUBRY VP FINANCE: SUBSIDIARY OF ST
JOSEPH PRINTING LIMITED-ST JOSEPH PRINTING LIMITED: CHAIRMAN
OF BOARD GAETANO GAGLIANO, VICE CHAIRMAN FRANK GAGLIANO, ANTHONY
GAGLIANO CHR & PR, TOM WEBER CA FINANCE, SUBSIDIARY OF ST JOSEPH
CORPORATION: ST JOSEPH CORPORATION, VICE CHAIRMAN-FRANK GAGLIANO,
ACTING CHAIRMAN GAETANO GAGLIANO (FOR ALFONSO GAGLIANO?),. PRES
ANTHONY GAGLIANO, VICE PRE RUDY DE SINGO, CONTROLLER BEATRICE
HO,ST JOSEPH OTTAWA HULL,ST JOSEPH DIGITAL SOLUTIONS: FOLLOWING
ARE PAGE NUMBERS/THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS STOLEN.:519-640: 520-624:
521-436:522-579:523-348:524-265:526-354:527-303:528-1:529-1:997-6
9:998-161:2191-62:2396-40:2397-201:2398-249:2399-423:2400-482:240
1-426:2402-4605:2403-283:2404-344:2405-432:2406-251:2407-327:2408
-457:2408-139:2410-468:2411-663:2412-477:2598-48:2599-420:2600-41
5:2601-318:2602-832:2603-642:2604-351:2605-459:2606-209:2607-266:
2608-259:2609-472:2610-217:2611-177;2612-378;2613-71;1517-51;1516
-221;1515-78;2994-249;2995-138;2996-302;2997-445;2998-175;2999-21
7;3000-252;3001-275;3003-177;3004-80;3005-41;3006-30;3007-30;3008
-56;3009-13;3010-16;3011-44;3012-28;3013-420;3014-304;3015-477;30
16-168;3017-309;3018-277;3019-174;3020-59;3021-69;3022-99;3023-20
6;3024-60;3025-46,3026-775;3119-23;3120-156;3121-80;3122-111;529-
249;999-420;3277-30;3278-235;1574-2902; THESE INSIDE CRIMINALS
OBTAINED 30 MILLION+- AND SPREAD IT AROUND POLITICIANS AND CIVIL
SERVANTS AND CROWN CORPORATION AND FOUNDATIONS THAT THE AUDITOR
GENERAL HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO AUDIT FOR 50 YEARS " TO CONTROL THE
CANADIAN GOVERNMENT". THE MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT ARE PATSIES
& DO NOT HAVE A VOTE EXCEPT IN A BLOCK & THE CIVIL SERVANTS
HAVE SET UP ALL THE METHODS TO STEAL TAXPAYERS MONEY & DO NOT
WANT TO GIVE UP THEIR POWER OF THEFT. THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY
IT IS A CLEPTOCRACY WHERE THE CLEPTOMANIACS:POLITICIANS/CIVIL
SERVANTS/CSIS/RCMP/JUDGES HOLD THE POWER OF THEFT WITH THE BANKS
HOLDING THE STOLEN MONEY IN SECRET BANK ACCOUNTS THAT NO ONE
CAN GET INTO EXCEPT THE THIEF. THESE SECRET ACCOUNTS ARE
DESTROYING THE WORLD. IT TAKES 4 YEARS TO DOUBLE YOUR MONEY
WHEN YOU PAY TAXES. PAY NO TAXES IN SECRET OFFHORE BANK ACCOUNTS
IT ONLY TAKES 1 1/2 YEAR. ITS TIME THE ENVIRONMENTAL PEOPLE
DEMONSTRATED IN ALL NATIONS OF THE WORLD TO GET RID OF OFFSHORE
BANK ACCOUNTS. EXAMPLE: CANADA IS A NARCO/GAMBLING/ALCOHOLIC/
PROSTITUTION NATION & THE MONEY IS HOT MONEY THAT GOES INTO
OFFSHORE BANK ACCOUNTS.BOOTLEG ALCOHOL PRODUCTION IS LARGER
THAN IN PROHIBITION. CANADA NOW WANTS TO LEGALIZE PERVERSION
& SAME SEX MARRIAGE BEFORE IT HITS THE PROVERBIAL BOTTOM AS
AN ADDICTED AND PERVERT NATION. PRIME MINISTER PAUL MARTIN IS
A MAFIA MONEY ADDICTED PRIME MINISTER & PAID NO TAXES IN CANADA
FOR 25 YEARS. LA FLEUR COMMUNICATION MARKETING STOLE$30 MILLION+-
NOT 12 MILLION THAT HE TOLD JUDGE GOMERY.
THESE OFFSHORE MAFIA ARE STRIPPING CANADA AS THEY DID ENRON ETC.
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO;191 HEADS OF NATIONS. LETTER NO: 716 E-MAIL ON.

BLOG 711 TAX MONEY THIEVES

2005-05-10T01:50:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS MARCH 3 TO 5, 2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA, ONTARIO FAX(613) 235-5573
K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION TYPE LETTER INTO A BLOG OR CHATROOM.
FEDERAL BRIBERY OF MEDIA & KICKBACK TALK: PART 5: AT THE REQUEST
OF THE PRIME MINITER, MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS & GOVERNMENT
SERVICES & CANADIAN HERITAGE T.B.822977 JUNE 15,1995 THE 20
MILLION WAS TO PROMOTE CANADIAN UNITY IN THE PERIOD LEADING
UP TO THE REFERENDUM IN QUEBEC AND IT WAS FOR EXPENDITURE FOR
PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH ACTIVITIES AND MEDIA BUYS. ONE OF THE
LARGEST MEDIA BUYS WAS FROM MEDIA I.D.A. VISION INC 50 MILLION+-
(EVEREST PROMOTION (G.E.C.M.) INC & 139264 CANADA INC & ECHO
PROMOTIONS (G.E.C.M.) WERE OLD NAMES OF EVEREST COMMANDITE
(G.E.C.M.) INC INCORP FEB 1,1985 DIRECTOR DAVID FLORENCE,CHARLES
CHOQUETTE, RICHARD H. FISHER, AMALGAMATED WITH MEDIA-I.D.A.
VISION INC DIRECTORS MICHEL OUELLET, RICHARD H. FISHER, DAVID
FLORENCE INCORP 1997/08/01 ON JAN 1,2004 WHOSE OLD NAME WAS
3397823 CANADA INC INCORP 1998/02/26 REGISTERED ADDRESS MONTREAL
MAILING ADDRESS 200 BAY STREET SUITE 2600 TORONTO. HOW MUCH
MONEY WENT TO THESE FIRMS ALSO) SPONSORSHIP FUND OBTAINED: MY
PAGE 401 TO 409: IN DOLLARS WITHOUT CENTS: 25,293- 194,643-
121,477- 77,143- 51,500- 124,285- 43,125- 77,250- 73,600-
1,005,778- 302,640- 48,000- 34,100- 42,825- 315,700-1,436,925-
276,515- 362,225- 453,650- 627,270- 1,120,882- 25,750- 52,400-
20,226- 129,230- 45,195- 129,600- 133,160- 103,690- 211,438- '
40,650- 346,367- 21,540- 64,564- 38,741- 2,941- 6,229- 563,834-
40,674- 18,623- 1,344,497- 119,404- 868,705- 10,279- 16,435-
53,127- 278,001- 53,968- 103,522- 166,499- 32,871- 12,058-
17,401- 25,956- 246,760- 918,791- 10,810- 26,090- 81,888-
115,289- 800,254- 10,491- 7,983- 1,864- 13,563- 5,704- 3,180-
2,367- 2,018- 4,690- 66,447- 3,220- 48,226- 125,765- 62,294-
23,943- 5,986- 7,180- 5,880- 6,400- 13,500- 29,855- 11,495-
PAGE 900 TO 907-- 11,200- 74,408- 27,705- 104,505- 32,382-
54,539- 13,081- 21,789- 12,754- 72,735- 23,009- 26,290- 7,283-
119,348- 4,049- 5,752- 5,525- 30,610- 37,692- 29,070- 367,847-
8,801- 14,473- 107,605- 3,648- 16,435- 171,295- 2,076,331- 1,038-
85,548- 2,076- 10,299- 1,241- 2,531- 14,535- 14,244- 4,672-
310- 8,305- PAGE 2140 TO 2144--56,022- 61,838- 92,467- 28,747-
70,861- 95,038- 17,098- 17,100- 1,440- 20,323- 19,359- 14,206-
413,343- 127,420- 69,159- 10,008- 61,825- 7,924- 14,866- 27,655-
54,742- 65,000- 20,190- 64,032- 163,967- 22,017- 1,058- 43,858-
79,928- 19,981- 36,101- 20,670-1,564,000- 103,521- 36,391-
477,250- 10,000- 387,550- 577,530- 634,665- 34,500- 529,000-
57,500- 368,000- 586,500- 26,680- 282,900- 20,447- 34,500-
1,048,800- 288,000- 69,000- 9,079,000- 728,300- 2,916,400-
707,000- 224,400- 117,504- 138,460- 30,845- 78,080- 62,767-
92,000- 13,800- 23,000- 2,048,478- 5,483- PAGE 2822 TO 2849

31 CHEQUES PER PAGE.
I WILL HIGHLIGHT THE LARGEST FOR THE ROYAL
CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE AND THE GOMERY INQUIRY TO INVESTIGATE
ALL CHEQUES TO MEDIA I.D.A. 123,050- 153,812- 498,700- 123,050-
110,210- 391,486- 184,575- 304,548- 323,006- 338,387- 304,548-
295-320- 295-320- 153-812- 137,762- 153-812- 107,668- 298,396-
267,259- 184,575- 165,315- 184,575- 220,420- 123,050- 123,050-
184,575- 165,315- 584,487- 369,150

HOW MUCH OF THIS MONEY WENT INTO SECRET OFFSHORE BANK ACCOUNTS?
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO:191 HEADS OF NATION. LETTER NO:711 E-MAIL ON

BLOG 704 TAX MONEY THIEVES

2005-05-10T01:22:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS FEBRUARY 5 TO 8,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON NONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA, ONTARIO FAX(613) 235-5573
K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca

DEAR HEAD OF NATION TYPE LETTER INTO BLOG OR CHATROOM THANKS.
FEDERAL BRIBING OF MEDIA & KICKBACK TALK: PART 3:
THE CANADIAN JUSTICE DEPARTMENT & THE COMMISSIONER JUDGE' GOMERY HAVE HAD ACCESS TO ALL DOCUMENTS IN A FULL FLOOR 75 FEET BY 75 FEET OF
FILING CABINETS RELATING TO KICKBACKS. THE JUSTICE TEAM TOOK
PHOTOCOPIES OF ALL THE FILES. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN
GOING OVER THE FILES SINCE TAKING THE COPIES. THE PUBLIC DOES
NOT HAVE ACCESS UNTIL A DOCUMENT IS PRESENTED TO THE HEARING
bY THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. I WAS PROVIDED WITH THE TREASURY
APPROVAL FOR 28.5 MILLION BUT NOT THE TREASURY APPROVAL FOR
250 MILLION++ FOR QUEBEC & THE REST OF CANADA. I WAS PROVIDED
WITH ALL THE FUNDS SPENT ALL ACROSS CANADA. WHERE THE 250 MILLION
+++ FUNDS CAME FROM I DO NOT KNOW. THE COUNSEL HAVE HAD NO RIGHT
TO SEE THE TREASURY AUTHORIZATION DOCUMENTS FOP QUEBEC AND
CANADA. IN A CRIMINAL TRIAL ALL ACCUSED GET DISCLOSURE OF ALL
DOCUMENTS THAT THE CROWN HAS TO INSURE A FAIR HEARING. JUDGE
SOPINKA AS HE THEN WAS RULED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
CASE OF REGINA VS STINCHCOtBE GIVING THIS ACCESS RIGHT TO ACCUSED
IN CRIMINAL CASES. ALL COU'N'SEL & PARTIES & THE PRESS HAVE A
RIGHT TO DISCLOSURE IN AN INQUIRY THAT INVOLVES ALL CANADIANS.
FULL DISCLOSURE OF CABINET DOCUMENTS ALSO IS ESSENTIAL FOR ALL
CITIZENS OF CANADA. DID THE MONEY COME FROM SWISS BANKS? THE
DIRECTOR OF ACCESS TO INFORMATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS ANITA LLOYD
DID NOT GIVE ME WHERE THE MONEY CAME FROM AND AN ACCOUNTING
OF HOW IT WAS SPENT AS SHE DID WITH THE 28.5 MILLION. ON SEPT
13,2004 I MADE THE FOLLOWING REQUEST TINDER THE ACCESS TO
INFORMATION ACT FOR " A LISTING OF ALL CHEQUES AND MONEY RECIEVED
OR DISBURSED INCLUDING DATE, AMOUNT, NAME OF RECIPIENT, REASON
FOR TRANSACTION FROM OR TO "CANADA INFORMATION OFFICE",
"COMMUNICATION COORDINATION SERVICE BRANCH""COMMUNICATION CANADA"
INCLUDING THE RECIEPT & TOTAL DISBURSEMENT OF ALL FUNDS FROM
THE "NATIONAL UNITY RESERVE" USED IN OUEB C FROM THE DATE OF
THE QUEBEC REFERENDUM 1995 TO OCTOBER 28,2004. DOCUMENTATION
BY THE CABINET OR LEGISLATION SETTING UP THE "NATIONAL UNITY
RESERVE", THE DOCUMENTS AND NAMES OF ALL OF THE SIGNATURES
SIGNING. THE FUNDS MAY NOT ALL BE FOR ADVERTISING BUT TO OTHER
CORPORATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS INSIDE OR OUTSIDE THE GOVERNMENT
AS LONG AS THE DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS IS THE SAME BY THE
DEPARTMENTS AS RECIEVED FROM THE NATIONAL UNITY FUND." "THE
DOCUMENTS REGARDING THE UNITY FUND RESERVE ARE SET OUT IN MY
LETTER 700 PART I BUT THEY DO NOT INCLUDE THE CABINET
DOCUMENTATION THAT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE AS ADVERTISING IS NOT
A MATTER OF NATIONAL INTEREST ESPECIALLY WHEN IT WAS USED AS
A CLOAK TO STEAL TAXPAYERS MONEY. THERE WERE 24 DOCUMENTS. THE
FILES OF THE CABINET SHOULD RE AVAILABLE TO JUDGE GOMERY/PUBLIC
IF THE GOVERNMENT IS TO BE --HONEST-- WITH THE CANADIAN PEOPLE.
THE 3,607 PAGES SHOW THE CHEQUES PAID OUT ALL ACROSS CANADA
TO PEOPLE koa CORPORATIONS-31 PER PAGE, 111,817 CHEQUES+-. ALL
THE CHEQUES ARE FOR MEDIA WORK. PRIME MINISTERS CHRETIEN & MARTIN
AND THEIR CABINETS ARE SUBJECT TO TRIALS FOR TREASON AND THEFT.
PARLIAMENT LAY CHARGES. ADD ALL FUNDS DISBURSED ON TO THE TAX
BILLS OF RECIPIENTS OF THE 111,817 CHEQUES.SEE: TORONTO STAR
FEB 4/05/A6 ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE WERE BRIBED 1.7 MILLION
TO STOP RCMP INVESTIGATIONS AND CRIMINAL CHARGES. THE RCMP ARE
ON THE TAKE WITH JUDGES/LAWYERS/PRIME MINIS.
NO JUSTICE LEFT.
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO:191 HEADS OF NATION. LETTER NO:704 E-MAIL ON.

BLOG 703 THEFT OF TAXPAYERS MONEY

2005-05-09T14:46:00.000-07:00

ttf~:~vL:: i'U.vk YHr. VUllas Uk 111r. VUlI:r.LrJS vi.t',t:Uist;l 4 10 U,c.U~I.J

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS FEBRUARY 4 TO 6,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA, ONTARIO FAX(613) 235-5573
K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca

DEAR HEAD OF NATION TYPE LETTER INTO A BLOC OR CHATROOM.THANKS
FEDERAL BRIBING OF MEDIA & KICKBACK TALK: PART 2:THESE ARE
SOME RECIPIENTS OF TAX PAYERS MONEY. JUDGE GOMERY KINDLY MAKE
ALL MY DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO ALL PARTIES. THE PUBLIC HAS A
RIGHT TO KNOW. WHO ELSE IS DEFRAUDING THE PUBLIC PURSE?
(1) PAUL MARTIN COMMUNICATION 2,605.64, 525.00, 1,463.14,
617.50,1561.17, 800.00, 3,015.22, 250.00, 570.00, 330.00,
805.00,1,800.00 140.00
(2)SPSS INC 14,106.75,2182.44,1343. 49,2754.18
(3) TARGET VISION INC 2700.00, 1620.00, 32625, 32835, 16194.94, 245287
(4) HIPBONE INC 1620, 83933, 30870, 17145,FAST COMPANY 54.01
(5) GENERAL DYNAMICS C4 SYSTEM 64,286.48
(6) QUANTUM MANGT SERVICE 1,552.28,88,748.63, 106,854.78
(7) AMEX BANK OF CANADA 399,352.93, 454,303.86, 714.59,
(8) AMERICAN EXPRESS 40,145.24, 1,947.57
(9) BANK OF MONTREAL 2,377.79, 1,695.00, 133,703,37, 83,671.39,
608.65, 22,730.10, 65,443.58,7,552.51, 21,785.05, 12:,172.10,
(10) CIBC VISA 995.00,
(11) IPSOS-REID CORP 6,225.02, 1,270.02,583,254.00,365,41.00
84,037.00, IPSOS-ASI LTD 8,000
(12)EXPOGRAPHIQ50,310.04,129,887.17, 3,374,633.17,3,220,857.15
(13) ETHICS CANADA 566.49, 758.49
(14)GLOBAL PUBLIC AFFAIRES 25,333.91,29,651,25,
(15) CREATEC 569.80, 18,004.02, 313,015.74,340,514,35,
(16)COMMUNICATIONS & STRATEGIE 29,537.39,113,625.00,23,200.00,
225,855.51, 173,019.99,
(17) STJOSEPH PRINT GROUP INC 159.29, 68,759.00, 1,455,818.39,
3,558.00, 1,429.92, 495,236.21, 3,558.00,1,429.92,
495,236.21,490,6.03.04, 81,345.92, 20,834.00,33,264.01,
591,433.59,7,861.00, 65,426.OOST JOSEPHS CORP. 191,425.00
ST JOSEPH PRINTING249,535.74, 191,425.00
(18) ST JOSEPHDIGITAL SOLUTIONS 1,701,926.08, 41,963.40, 117,498.18,
77,047.43, 117,298.18, 77,047.43, 519.79, 109,863.86, 143,691.23,
(19) LOWE MARTIN 101,590.14, 101,590.14,91,614.99,4,454.45,
(20)CANADA POST CORP 11,971.,90,1,173,111.62, 123,471.95, 49,910.04,
67,869.00
(21) APS-ANTIAN PROFESSIONAL 25.70,13.27, 530,478.19,
1,127,908.00, 517,099.92,
ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICEWHY HAS TH COMMISSIONER
NOT LAID CHARGES?
PEACE

HA ROLD C FUNK TO:191 HEADS OF NATION.LETTER NO:703 E-MAIL ON

BLOG 701 THEFT OF TAXPAYERS ASSETS TALK

2005-05-09T14:15:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS JANUARY 31-FEB 3/2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA, ONTARIO FAX(613) 235-5573
K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatouthestreet.ottawa.on.ca

DEAR HEAD OF NATION TYPE LETTER INTO A BLDG OR CHATROOM.
FEDERAL BRIBERY OF MEDIA & 'KICKBACK TALK: THE FEDERAL ACCESS
TO INFORMATION DOCUMENTS. PRIOR TO THE QUEBEC REFERENDUM THE
FOLLOWING TOOK PLACE. IN A LETTER DATED DEC 18,1995 TO MR J.C.
STOBBE ASSISTENT DEPUTY MINISTER GOVERNMENT OPERATIONAL SERVICES
BRANCH FROM DIRECTOR GENERAL AND PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH MR
GUITE STATES " FOLLOWING TREASURY BOARD APPROVAL OF THE 11.5
MILLION ITEM IN THE 1995-6 SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES CHARGEABLE
TO PUBLIC WORKS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES VOTE-20 SUPPLY AND
SERVICES PROGRAM TO FUND CANADIAN UNITY-RELATED ADVERTISING
AND PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH ACTIVITIES, YOU WILL FIND ENCLOSED
A DETAILED REPORT OF EXPENDITURES.
(1) MARCH 31,1996 ADVERTISING & PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH (APORS)
BUDGET 1995-6:
REPORT 1:
$11,493,814:
REPORT 2: $1,488,882:
REPORT 3:$303,000:
REPORT 4:$3,208,000.
TOTAL $16,493,694.
4 WAS AMENDED TO SHOW $1,208,000
RATHER THAN $3,208,000.(2 MILLION GONE WHERE)
(2) APORS BUDGET \BREAKDOWN: SPECIAL PROGRAMS $5,210,071:
UNITY REPORT
1:$11,493,814:
UNITY REPORT 2 $1,488,882:
UNITY REPORT 3:$303,000:
UNITY REPORT 4: $3,208,000 (TRANSFERRED TO CANADIAN
HERITAGE) TOTAL 21,703,767 BUDGET $16,014,000 BALANCE
$5,689,767.
SPECIAL PROGRAMS:$5,210,071 WENT TO AMONG OTHER
ADVERTISING FIRMS:
COMMUNICATIONS-LAFLEUR $105,000,$115,000,
$446,000, $120,200,$501,000,$205,400,$63,000,$ 15,575,$69,000,
$620,000,$110,000,$850,000,$51,700, $83,751,$12,100 (TOTAL
$3,367,726),
MCGILL GENESIS $125,000,
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS
$306,500.
PALMER JARVIS $308,000
GINGKO GROUP $301,600,WITH22 OTHER MEDIA GETTING
UNDER $100,000.
REPORT 1:INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS PROJECTS:
GENESIS/BCP GROUP $5,460,000, $364,200,$8,500,
$2,250,000,$33,000,$154,000 (TOTAL $8,269,700).
BRONFMAN FOUNDATION $1,000,000,
LAFLEUR 798,000,
GROUP EVEREST $687,460
GINGKO $159,360,
TRANSFER TO NATURAL RESOURCES $120,000,
TRANSFER TO PARKS CANADA $150,000,
CROP $110,500. WITH 9 OTHERS GETTING THE BALANCE OF THE
$11,493,814.
REPORT 2: GROUPS EVEREST/GENESIS $1,117,500
LA FLEUR $356,900 WITH 2 OTHERS ALL TOTALING $1,488,882.
REPORT 3: BCP $50,000
GROUPS EVEREST $250,000--
$303,000 TRANSFERRED TO APORS BUDGET.
GROUP 4: LAFLEUR $3,208,000. 5 PROGRAMS
TOTAL EXPENDITURE $21,703,767.
TREASURY BOARD T.B.822977 APPROVED $20,000,000 AT THE
REQUEST OF
"THE PRIME MINISTER""MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS AND GOVERNMENT
SERVICES""CANADIAN HERITAGE" ON JULY 14,1995 SIGNED BY PAUL
THIBAULT:
PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE $5 MILLION:
PUBLIC WORKS $10 MILLION:
CANADIAN HERITAGE $5 MILLION.
"TREASURY BOARD(TB823393)' AT THE REQUEST OF
"THE PRIME MINISTER"
"THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES"
"CANADIAN HERITAGE" ON OCTOBER 25,1995 APPROVED $5 MILLION
AND ON OCT 26,95 T.B.823393 APPROVED $3.5 MILLION.
TOTAL $28.5 MILLION. WHERE DID THE 8.5 MILLIONGO?
THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HAS OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE BY NOT
DISCLOSING THIS INFORMATION IN THEIR CONTROL.
LA FLEUR GOT $7,730,626,
EVEREST $2,054,960
BCP GROUPS/GENESIS $9,562,200,
BRONFMAN FOUNDATION $1 MILLION,
AND ON AND ON.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES, THE MINISTER OF CANADIAN HERITAGE, THE PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE WERE ALLOCATED THE $28,500,000 AND
THEY PARTICIPATED IN THE THEFT WITH THE CABINET FROM THE TREASURY.
SEE: LETTER DATED JAN 17,2005
FROM ANITA LLOYD TO ME A-200400482/lb 3607 PAGES 111,817 CHEQUES
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO:191 HEADS OF NATION.LETTER NO:701 E-MAIL ON

BLOG 732 DEMOCRACY OF PEACE

2005-05-08T01:42:00.000-07:00

HAROLD C FUNK THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS MAY 9 TO 12,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA,COMMENT:http://thevoiceless.blogspot.com FAX(613)235-5573
ONTARIO K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION
SEE:http://politheft.blogpot.com
DEMOCRACY OF PEACE TALK: I RECOMMEND TO YOU MY NEW BLOG
"GOVERNMENT THEFT AND VOTE BUYING BY GOVERNMENT OF CANADA UNDER
THE GUISE OF UNITY" http://politheft.blogspot.com FOR YOUR
COMMENTS.
THE BANKRUPTCY OF MILITARY GOVERNMENTS.
IN LOVING MEMORY OF THE CITIZENS OF THE NATION OF ZIMBABWE.
IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH DEMOCRACIES OF PEACE IN 191 NATIONS
I SHALL EXPECT GOVERNMENTS TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURES OF PEACE:
(1) MEN AND WOMEN FROM THE AGE OF 16 TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO A
SECRET BALLOT IN FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS.
(2) ALL POLITICAL PARTIES TO BE ABOLISHED.
(3) ALL MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT TO BE
"INDEPENDENT MEMBERS °
AND TO HAVE SECRET BALLOTS IN PARLIAMENT
AND ALL WORK IN COMMITTES.
(4) RULES TO ELECT BY SECRET BALLOT THOSE TO RUN IN EACH RIDING.
(5) A NON VOTING PRESIDENT (ELECTED BY SECRET BALLOT OF
INDEPENDANT MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT) EXCEPT
WHERE THERE IS ONE VOTE NECESSARY TO PASS/NOT PASS LEGISLATION.
(6) A 60% SECRET VOTE OF MEMBERS TO PASS LEGILATION WITH A
MINIMUM OF 95% OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT PRESENT.
(7) ALL LEGISLATION TO BE PASSED TO BE ORDERED BY
A LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
AND DRAFTED BY THE CIVIL SERVICE
AND APPROVED IN COMMITTEE TO COME BEFORE PARLIAMENT.
(8) THE SENATE TO FOLLOW THE SAME PROCEDURES
WHERE A NATION HAS ONE
(9) THE UNITED NATIONS TO FOLLOW THE SAME PROCEDURE WITH
NO VETO POWER BY ANY MEMBER.
(10) A SEPARATE AUDIT COMMITTEE OF ACCOUNTANTS
TO AUDIT ALL DEPARTMENTS & CORPORATIONS
OF ALL GOVERNMENTS YEARLY.
(11) THE JUDICIARY TO HAVE A SEPARATE BUDGET
OBTAINED BY TAX PAYER APPROVAL.
JUDGES TO PASS A QUALIFICATION COMMITTEE OF PARLIAMENT
WITH TERMS FOR 10 YEARS UNLESS APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE
FORA FURTHER TERM OF 5 YEARS.
NO SECRET COURTS OR NAMES OF CHILDREN WITHHELD
FROM THE PUBLIC OR PRESS IN ORDER TO PROTECT CHILDREN.
(12) FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AT ALL JUDICIAL HEARINGS OR HEARING
OF PARLIAMENT.
ALL REPORTS FOR GOVERNMENT TO BE MADE PUBLIC.
(13) PROTECTION FROM LIBEL FOR MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT DURING
SITTINGS OF PARLIAMENT.
(14) ABOLISHMENT OF PRESS GALLERIES AND
RADIO & TV CONTROLLED BY THE GOVERNMENT THAT WERE ONLY THERE
TO PROTECT THE PARTY IN POWER.
(15) THE PROTECTION OF ALL CREATIONS INCLUDING
HUMANS FROM HUMANS.
(16) PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION DATE SET FOR EVERY 5 YEARS.
(17) THE PRESIDENT & INDEPENDANT MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT
TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO ONLY 2 CONSECUTIVE TERMS
AS PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT.
(18) THE CONSTITUTION TO BE CHANGED BY A 2/3 MAJORITY OF MEMBERS
OF PARLIAMENT WITH NO CHANGE OF THAT PROVISION FOR 15 YEAR
WITHOUT AN 80% MAJORITY OF MEMBERS VOTING FOR IT.
AFTER OBSERVING PARLIAMENTS AROUND THE WORLD STEALING FOR
23 YEARS OR TORTURING/RAPING/PERVERTING/MURDERING/WARING WITH
EACH OTHER IN UNJUSTIFIED WARS I RECOMMEND THESE CHANGES.

I RECOMMEND THESE PROCEDURES FOR A GLOBAL PARLIAMENT.

REASON: ON THE TAKE TALK:
(1) PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU A PERVERT SAID
" THE NATION HAS NO RIGHT TO BE IN THE BEDROOMS OF THE NATION" APPROVING PERVERSION OF ALL CITIZENS.
(2) SEE: "ON THE TAKE" CRIME, CORRUPTION IN THE MULRONEY YEARS.
(3) THE SAME CORRUPTION IN THE CHRETIEN YEARS AND THE MARTIN YEARS AS PROVEN BY JUDGE GOMERY WITNESSES
(4) MARTIN BRIBING AN OPPOSITION MEMBER WITH AN AMBASSADORHIP.
(5) MARTIN BRIBING QUEBEC VOTERS FOR REFERENDUM VOTES
& BRIBING VOTERS WITH 7 BILLION TO VOTE LIBERAL
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO: 192 HEADS OF NATION. LETTER NO: 732 E-MAIL O

POLITICAL THEFT

2005-05-03T13:07:00.000-07:00

IN THE NEXT 24 PAGES J.C. GUITE GAVE HIS REPORT TO MR J.C. STOBBE ASSISTANT DEPUTY
MINISTER GOVERNMENT OPERATIONAL SERVICES BRANCH WITH REGARD TO THE UNITY FUND SET UP WITHOUT PARLIAMENTARY APPROVAL TO STOP THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC FROM SEAPARATING IN THE 1995 REFERENDUM. THE MONEY WAS USED TO BUY VOTES IN QUEBEC TO KEEP CANADA UNIFIED. from 1995 to 2003 DEPENDING ON WHO YOU CAN BELIEVE 250 MILLION WAS SPENT, 680 million was spent OR BETWEEN 50 TO 100 MILLION A YEAR WAS SPENT, 10 BILLION WAS SPENT THAT WENT INTO 10 FOUNDATIONS THAT THE AUDITOR GENERTAL COULD NOT AUDIT BECAUSE THE POLITICIANS WANTED TO STEAL THE MONEY OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. I DID AN ACCESS TO INFORMATION REQUEST AND OBTAINED THE FOLLOWING 24 PAGES AND 3,600 MORE PAGES THAT CONTAINED 31 ENTERIES ON EACH PAGE SHOWING THE RECIPIENT OF UNITY THEFT MONEY, THE AMOUNT, THE CONTRACT, AND THE CHEQUE NUMBER. over 111 CHEQUES WERE SENT OUT WITHOUT LAWFULL AUTHORITY. PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN DENIES HE STOLE THE MONEY WITH HIS CABINET WHICH INCLUDE PRIME MINISTER MARTIN AND AMBASSADOR GAGLIANO, SHEILA COPPS AND OTHERS. THE ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE THAT WERE PAYED OFF 1.7 MILLION NOT TO INVESTIGATE IN THREE YEARS HAVE ONLY LAID 4 CHARGES OF THEFT OF TAXPAYERS MONEY. THE PRIME MINISTERS DENY DENY DENY THEY ARE THIEVES ALTHOUGH JEAN CHRETIEN HAS ABOUT 30 MILLION DOLLARS IN HIS SECRET BANK ACCOUNT IN SWITZERLAND AND PRIME MINISTER MARTIN KEEPS ALL HIS ASSETS OFFSHORE AND HAS NOT PAID ANY TAXES IN CANADA FOR 25 YEARS. THE NEXT 24 PAGES SHOWS HOW THEFT OF CANADIAN TAX PAYERS MONEY HAS BEEN STOLEN SINCE CONFEDERATION WITH THE SAME THEFT PROCEDURE BEING FOLLOWED.
THE PRIME MINISTERS AND THE OTHER THIEVES BELIEVE THEY CAN NOT GO TO JAIL BECAUSE THEY OWN THE POLICE-JUDGES-AND JAILS AND THEREFORE HAVE NO ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE CITIZENS OF CANADA. ITS TIME TO THROW THESE CROOKS OUT OF GOVERNMENT AND PUT THEM IN JAIL FOR THE REMAIDER OF THEIR THIEVING LIVES.
ENJOY READING THE PROCEDURE HOW POLITICIANS HAVE STOLEN MONEY AS THEY PURPORTED TO GOVERN THE NATION.
ANYONE CAN POST EVIDENCE OF POLITICIANS THEFT IN EVERY NATION OF THE WORLD.
BOOKMARK http://politheft.blogspot.com I HAVE AN INTERNATIONAL NEWSPAPER AND I WILL EXPOSE THE THIEVES IN PRINT.

PAGE 1

2005-05-03T11:21:00.000-07:00

Government
of Canada

....... ...„.NDUM

Mr. J.C. Stobbe

Assistant Deputy Minister

Government Operational Services Branch

Director General
Advertising and Public Opinion Research Sector

DATE 1995-12-18

OBJECT RESOURCES TO SUPPORT CANADIAN UNITY

Following Treasury Board approval of the $11,500,000 items in th 1995-1996
Supplementary Estimates chargeable to Public Works and Government Services Vote 20-
Supply and Services Program to fund Canadian Unity-related advertising and public
opinion research activities, you will find enclosed the detailed report of expenditures.

Should you need additional information, do not hesitate to contact me at 995-1427.

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY by

J. C, Guite

Encl.

PAGE 2

2005-05-03T11:06:00.000-07:00

MARCH 31,1996
ADVERTISING & PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH
BUDGET 1995-1996
OPERATING BUDGET $ 4,514,000
EXPENDITURES Y.T.D. $ 5,210.071
BALANCE $ 696,071
RESOURCES TO SUPPORT CANADIAN UNITY
REPORT 1 (T.B. APPROVAL) $ 11,493,814
REPORT 2 (BEFORE T.B. ON DEC 14,1995) $ 1,488,882
REPORT 3 $ 303,000
REPORT 4 $ 3.208,000

comment : report 4 on pages 2 and 3 . where did the 2 million go. into the turks and cacos offshore government bank accounts???

PAGE 3

2005-05-03T10:58:00.000-07:00

MARCH 31,1996
ADVERTISING & PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH (APORS)
BUDGET 1995-1996
OPERATING BUDGET $4,514,000
EXPENDITURES Y.T.D. $5,210,071
BALANCE ($ 696,071)
RESOURCES TO SUPPORT CANADIAN UNITY
REPORT 1 (T.B. APPROVALS) $ 11,493,814
REPORT 2 (BEFORE T.B. ON DEC 14,1995 $ 1,488,882
REPORT 3 $ 303,000
REPORT 4 $ 1,208,000

PAGE 4

2005-05-03T10:45:00.000-07:00

APORS - BUDGET
BREAKDOWN

SPECIAL PROGRAMS $ 5,210,071

Unity (report #1) $ 11,493,814

tititty (report 2) $ 1,488,882**

Unity (report #(3) $ 303,000 ***

Unity (report #4) S 3,208,000 ****

Total $ 21,703,767

Budget $ 16 014,000

BALANCE: ($5,689 767)

* $335,000 has been transferred to APORS budget from client
departments.

**Unity (Report #2) £or: T.B. approval (TB submission $ 1,500,000)

*** Transfer of $303,000 from Canadian Heritage

**** Transfer of $3,208,000 from Canadian Heritage

MARCH 31, 1996

PAGE 5

2005-05-03T10:10:00.000-07:00

SPECIAL PROGRAMS
Communications Lafleur EN771-5-0025 $105,000
Comtext EN771-5-0002* $ 22,500
Ekos Research EN771-5-0031 $ 10,000
Communication Jean Lafleur EN771-5-0023 $115,000
Gosselin & Associ6s EN771-5-0006* $ 47,500
Info-Editique Ferron EN771-5-0004* $ 30,000
Infras EN771-5-0101 $ 28,000
Living Dimensions EN771-5-0003* $ 30,000
McGill-Genesis EN771-5-0005* $125,000
O'Malley EN771-5-0009* $ 60,000
Parkins Communications EN771-5-0008 $ 90,000
Quad Consulting EN771-5-0007 $ 60,000
Sponsorium International EN771-5-0027* $ 24,000
Compass Communications EN771-5-0053 $181,500
Environics Research EN771-5-0051 $ 20,000
Gingko Group EN771-5-0050 $301,600
Weaver, Tanner & Miller EN771-5-0062 $ 5,000
Transfer to Capital Budget $ 6,300
Lafleur EN771-5-0071 $446,000
Lafleur EN771-5-0070 $120,200
Lafleur EN771-5-0068 $501,000
Lafleur EN771-5-0067 $205,400
Lafleur EN771-5-0102 $ 63,000
Lafleur EN771-5-0103 $ 15,575
Lafleur EN771-5-0116 $ 69,000
Lafleur EN771-5-0163 $620,000
Lafleur EN771-5-0164 $110,000
Lafleur/Genesis EN771-5-0069 $850,000
Lafleur/Genesis EN771-5-0077* $ 51,700
Lafleur/Genesis EN771-5-0079 $ 83,751
Lafleur/Genesis EN771-5-0080 $ 12,100
Strategy EN771-5-0081 $ 26,350

Communication Coffin EN771-5-0083 $105,000
Signature/Genesis EN771-5-0085* $ 70,000
ComStrat EN771-5-0089$ 15,950
Groupe Everest EN771-5-0091 $ 20,930
Palmer Jarvis EN771-5-0093 $308,000
Groupe Everest EN771-5-0123 $ 25,000
Genesis Media EN771-5-0127 $ 15,000
Corporate Research Associates EN771-5-0135 $ 3,300
Infras Inc. EN771-5-0154 $120,000
Trans-Canada Trail Foundation EN771-5-0170

$150,000
Angus Reid EN771-5-0176 $ 6,000
Thomas R. Creary & Assoc. EN771-5-0165 $ 10,000
Compass Communications EN771-5-0182 $125,000
$5,409,656
Less $ 199,585*
* De-commitments &5,210,071

MARCH 31, 1996

PAGE 6

2005-05-03T09:51:00.000-07:00

REPORT # 1)

INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS PROJECTS

SUPPLIER REQUISITION AMOUNT
EnvironiCS EN771-5-UO37 $ 4,500
(Focus Quebec)

Genesis Media EN771-5-U013* $364,200
(Nat'l Citizenship Week)

The Gingko Group EN771-5-UO34 $ 1,000
(Prod. of Ads)

Groupe BCP EN771-5-UO32 $154,000
(Advertising concepts)

Groupe Everest EN771-5-UO33 $ 50,000
(Advertising concepts)

Mantle & Overall EN771-5-UO35 $ 33,500
(Re-design of artwork)

The Gingko Group EN771-5-UO49 $118,000
(Canada Day Insert)

Tyrell Press EN771-5-UO41 $ 2,350
(Posters)

Trans-Canada Trail EN771-5-UO73 $ 30,000
(Production of PSA'S)

Gingko Group EN771-5-UO78 $ 40,360
(Canada Day)

Genesis (Signature) EN771-5-UO84 $ 8,500
(Quebec 2002)

CROP EN771-5-UO86 $ 21,000
(Sondage Avril)

Angus Reid EN771-5-UO87 $ 4,450
(Reid Report)

Signature Communication EN771-5-UO90 $ 46,000
(Pamphlets)

Tyrell Press EN771-5-UO94 $ 23,000
(Posters)

CROP EN771-5-UO95 $ 17,500
(Sondage Juin)

BCP Group/Genesis EN771-5-U100* $5,460,000
(Advertising) (production: $1,460,000
meida: $4,000,000)

United Nations Assoc. EN771-5-U104 $ 15,330

(PSA' s un/50canada tAG &1-800

COMMENT: WERE ALL OF THESE FALSE INVOICES???

PAGE 7

2005-05-03T09:25:00.000-07:00

Sound Venture EN771-5-U105 $ 18,700
(PSA's)

Comm. Jean Lafleur EN771-5-U110 $ 288,000
(Molson Indy YVR)

CROP

(Sondage Aout/95) EN771-5-U111 $ 30,000

PRPCSS

(CollaterAL MATERIAL EN771-5-U112 $ 59,500

CROP

(Health Canada) EN771-5-U118 $ 41,000

Genesis Media Inc. EN771-5-U117* $2,250,000
(Outdoor - Lafleur)

Groupe Everest/Genesis
(B FDRQ) EN771-5-U136 $ 565,000

Bronfman Foundation EN771-5-U145 $ 1,000,000
(Heritage Minutes)

Communication Lafleur EN771-5-U144 $ 285,000
(Production - Advertising)

Communication Lafleur EN771-5-U162 $ 225,000
(Production -Advertising)

Transfer to Parks Canada EN771-5-U171 $ 150,000

Transfer to Natural EN771-5-U153 $ 120,000
Resources

Canada Communications EN771-5-U178 $ 36,650
Group

Groupe Everest EN771-5-U190 $ 37,460
(Production)

Groupe Everest EN771-5-U222 $ 35,000
(Production)

Genesis Media EN771-5-U224 $ 33,000
(Placement)
TOTAL: $11,500,000

LESS: $ 6,186*
$11,493,814
* DE-COMMITMENTS
MARCH 31, 1996

PAGE 8

2005-05-03T08:35:00.000-07:00

REPORT # 2)
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS PROJECTS
SUPPLIERS REQUISITION AMOUNT
GROUP EVEREST/GENESIS(X) EN771-5-U184 $ 557,500
GROUPE EVEREST EN771-5-U199 $ 555,000
ANGUS REID EN771-5-U200 $ 1,423
COMMUNICATIONS LA FLEUR EN771-5-U110 $ 6,900
GENISES MEDIA EN771-5-U219 $ 5,000
LAFLEUR COMMUNICATIONS EN771-5-U229 $ 350,000
PRPCSS En771-5-U228 $, 53,100
TOTAL $ 1,528,923
LESS: $ 40,041
$ 1,488,882
(X) DE-COMMITMENTS
MARCH 31, 1996

PAGE 9

2005-05-03T08:16:00.000-07:00

(REPORT # 3)

INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS PROJECTS

SUPPLIERS REQUISITION AMOUNT

BCP Group EN771-5-U205 $ 50,000*

Groupe Everest EN771-5-UO28 $ 250,000*

Adworks EN771-5-U212 $ 3,000*

* $303,000 has been transferred to APORS
budget from client DEPARTMENT.
March 31,1996

PAGE 10

2005-05-03T03:34:00.000-07:00

REPORT #4)

Lafleur Communication EN771-5-U226 $3,208,000

**** Transfer of funds from client department - Canadian Heritage

MARCH 31, 1996

page 11

2005-05-03T03:06:00.000-07:00

The Treasury Board
division (3)
L.Ruedl
Registry
T.Mercier
Estimates

DECISION OF THE TREASURY BOARD
MEETING OF JUNE 15,1995

T.B. 822977

TO: Mr. Ranald Quail

Deputy Minister of Public Works

and Government Services

SUBJECT:
Resources to Support
Canadian Unity

Treasury Board approved the request

of the Prime Miniurer and the

Ministers of Public Works and

Government Servic=s and Canadian

Heritage for the inclusion of an item,

of up to $20,000,000 in 1995-95

Supplementary Estimates as well as

other related authorities to promote

Canadian unity in the period leading

to the referendum to be held in
Quebec.

More specifically in regard to the

Department of Public Works and
Government Services, ministers
approved the following

the inclusion of an item of up to

$10,000,000 in 1995-96

supplementarv estimates chargeable

to Pubic Works and Government

Services Vote 20 Supply and

Services Program to fund Canadian

Unity-related advertising

public opinion research

activities

PAGE12

2005-05-03T02:30:00.000-07:00

the creative services and "media
buy" actions provided from these
funds are to conform with the
established Treasury Board policy
and guidelines and provide added
value to the Crcwn; and

the denartment is to provide
full hreakdnwn and detailed report
on actual expenditures on these
public opinion resea-rch activities
and media buys to the Treasury
Board 5ecretariat by December 31,
1995.

Paul Thilbault,
Assistant Secretary,
program Branch

PAGE 13

2005-05-03T02:13:00.000-07:00

PCO Canadian Heritage PWGSC

SUBJECT

Inclusion of an item in Supplementary

Estimates and increases in reference levels

for initiatives related to the promotion of

Canadian tnity during the pre-referendum

and referendum period for the following

departments programs: Privy Council

Office: Canadian Heritage

multiculturalism, Canadian Studies and

Officiai Languages: and Public Works and

Government Services Canada - Advertising

and Public Opinion Research Sector.
Qouvernementaux Canada - Secteur de la
publicit6 et de la recherche sur I'opinion
publique.

PROPOSAL

Athority to include the following items in
Supplementary Estimates in 1995-96:

Minister of Canadian Heritage

PAGE 14

2005-05-03T01:54:00.000-07:00

Privy Council Office

$5M for personnel and operating -

expenses required for national unity

related activities within the Privy

Council Office, particularly the

Intergovernmental Affairs

Secretariat and the coordination of

the overall government effort to
promote and strengthen federalism;

Public Works and Government

Services Canada

a S10M item to fund national unity

related advertising and public
opinion research:

Canadian Heritage

S5M for payment of grants and

contributions in accordance with the

terms and conditions of the

Multicultural. Canadian Studies and

Official Languages Programs and
related operational costs;

authority to exceed the current $2M

maximum amount of any grant or

contribution which may be given to
one recipient, per project per fiscal
year; and

a temporary allotment of $4M from

Treasurv Board. Vote 5 -

Government Contingencies, to
permit immediate payment of

grants.

PAGE 15

2005-05-02T12:27:00.000-07:00

COST
S20M to be allocated as follows
Privy Council Office
$5M chargeable to Vote 1
Program expenditures
Canadian Heritage
Canadian Identity Program, $4M,
Vore 10 - Grants and Contributions
($3M Official Languages Support
Activity and $1M Participation
Activity and $1M Operating
Expenditure
Public Works and Government
Services Canada
$10M chargeable to Vote 2o
Supply and Services Program
SOURCE OF FUNDS
Earmarked monies set aside at one time of
the 1995 Budget.
REMARKS
See Appendix A.
DEPARTMENTAL CONTACTS
Privv Council Office
Marc Lafreniere - 947-7571
Public Works and Government
Services Canada
Rick Neville - 956-1715
Canadian Heritage
Lyette Dore 947-7415
/

PAGE 16

2005-05-02T12:15:00.000-07:00

OMNIBUS St-B.NIISSION - CANADIAN UNITY

REMARKS

Canada continues to face challenges with respect to national unity and the continuing
evolution of the federation. The Government of Canada has consistently maintained that
Canadian Unity will be preserved and enhanced through good government. In that regard, it
has embarked on,an initiative to ensure that the benefits derived from the federation are well
understood by. supporting research, planning and communications activities designed to

ensure that Canadians are well informed. This will provide background for the decisions that
will be taken :n context of the debate leading up to and including the proposed referendum in
Quebec. This initiative will involve supporting activities of the Privy Council Office, the
department of Canadian Heritage and Public Works and Government Services Canada.

This approach assumes that a referendum will be held in the fall of 1995. Should, the
referendum be held later than the end of 1995, it may be necessary to revisit the approach
proposed herein.

Privy Council Office

The approach of the government in Quebec has had an impact on the federal-provincial
relations climate. The management of these more difficult relations has significantly
increased the workload of the Privy Council Office, particularly Intergovernmental Affairs.

On November 4. 1993, the Honourable Marcel Masse was appointed President of the
Queen's Privy Council for Canada, \1inisier of Intergovernmental Affairs and Minister
responsible for Pubic Service Renewal. In order to support the Minister in his various
responsibilities. PCO required additional resources for new and enhanced departmental
functions ( T.B. 821150, February 17, 1994). The resources were mainly allocated to the
following areas of activity: Government Renewal Secretariat; Intergovernmental Affairs;
Program Review: Communications and Consultations; provision of additional secretariat
support to the Minister in his responsibilities related to Public Service Renewal and
Administration.

On February 22, 1995, the Prime Minister announced the appointment of the Honourable
Luciepne Robillard as Minister responsible for the federal campaign in the upcoming Quebec
referendum. The Minister is responsible for the development of the government's position
on the full range of issues raised in the context of the referendum debate in Quebec and
related unity concerns in all other regions of the federation.

PAGE17

2005-05-02T12:04:00.000-07:00

The Privy Council Office «ill support Minister Robillard in this capacity. It will also
provide enhanced support and assistan~_- to the Prime Minister and Minister Masse on all
federal policy and communications masers relating to federal-provincial relations and the
management of the federation. Additional resources in the amount of $5M are required to
support the new and enhanced initiatives related to the promotion of Canadian Unity during
the pre-referendum and referendum peFlod. These resources will support the strong cadre of
senior public servants required to oversee the plamung, research and development of the
position of the federal government and :.he preparation of analytical papers on the potential
impact of the current political situation )n all regions of Canada, interest groups, etc.

The Policy Development and Constitut nal Affair--, Secretariat will enhance its capacity to
address the increasingly complex governsrtent-wide strategic policy and planning issues
related to the evolution of the federation and the conduct of federal-provincial relations
activities during the pre-referendum an' referendum period. It will also provide in-depth
analysis and background materials on related issue-, and provide analysis and commentary on
the increasing numbers of academic sm-'ies on the discussions. These activities will support
the Government's efforts to reinforce t_ e value of the evolving federation.

The Strategic Planning and Liaison Dig ision will work with non-government organizations in
developing and promoting Canadian Unity both within Quebec and elsewhere in Canada in
support of the Minister and the Prime Minister in their outreach activities.

The Communications Division will be -esponsible for the development and implementation of
the federal communications strategy, rr.edia monitoring, analysis, speech-writing, editing.
translation and graphic services, distribution services and administrative operations. This
may include the requirement to establish a strengthened regional presence to deal expediently
with media matters and advertising. ]::-;-y will also work with other concerned departments
and agencies to coordinate all commur =ations initiatives that impact on national unity.

Public Works and Government Service• Canada

Under the direction of the Privy Counca Office, Public Works and Government Services
Canada will provide suppon in the con_uct of all public opinion research and advertising in
support of this initiative.

Under the guidance of the Pl;«y Council Office. the Advertising and Public Opinion Research
Sector (APORS) will coordinaae the taste of the five !;5) agencies assigned to this file. They will
ensure that the creative sen'ices and/or 'media buy" conform with the established Treasury
Board policy and guidelines and that the`, provide .added value to the Crown. In addition,
they will ensure that all cotnmurucations services. Including the advertising and public
opinion research are competitive as rec--fired and sibs:quently that appropriate contracts are
issued.

PAGE 18

2005-05-02T11:53:00.000-07:00

The resources will be allocated in the following three areas:

Public opinion research (including focus group testing);

Extending the media buy for existing campaigns or for campaigns being developed by
government departments and/or related campaigns undertaken by others:

Media buy for other government advertising campaigns (this will include production
and -pfMtt(jcosts as required).

Canadian Heritaue

Canadian identity has as its basis, strong principles of tolerance and the acceptance of
differences. Regional parties have now emerged on the national scene that are openly hostile
to a number of federal policies including the linguistic policy and multiculturalism. This
situation has resulted in a significant increase in the call for and visibility of the department
of Canadian Heritage Multiculturalism, Canadian Studies and Support for Official Languages
programs.

The development and maintenance of a strong coalition of partners and support networks of
Canadians in all regions and in all sectors of our society will be critical this year. The
department of Canadian Heritage will continue to support third parties who promote

Canadian identity in their respective field of activities. In addition, Canadian Heritage will
continue to provide technical support to other federal departments (speeches, discussion
papers. etc.) and information to interested organizations and spokespersons and assist in the
coordination of activities of various groups and networks in all regions of Canada. These
activities will be undertaken as part of federal initiatives led and coordinated by the Privy
Council Office.

The various partners and spokespersons that will be financially supported and/or provided
with technical assistance as a result of these new funds are to be publicly visible. In
particular, they will be encouraged, through a wide range of activities, to defend the merits
of a united Canada, and respond to those who oppose a bilingual, multicultural country and
in more general terms, in identifying and showcasing various facets of the Canadian identity.

PAGE 19

2005-05-02T11:42:00.000-07:00

PRESENTATION D'ENSEMBLE - UNITE CANADIENNE

OBSERVATIONS

L'uni,Id nationale et 1'dvolution constante de la federation continuent de poser des defis au
Canada. Le gouvernement canadien a toujours soutenu que l'unite du pays serait
sauvegardee et renforcee par une same gestion publique. 11 s'est lance a ce propos dans une
initiative visant a faire connaitre les avantages decoulant de la federation, et ce, au moven
d'activitds de recherche, de planification et de communication. Ces activites serviront de
toile de fonds pour les decisions qui seront prises dans le contexte du debat prereferendaire et
referendaire au Quebec. L'initiative proposee comprendra 1'appui aux activites du Bureau du
Conseil prive, du ministere du Patrimoine canadien et de Travaux publics et Services
gouvernementaux Canada.

Cette approche suppose qu'il y aura referendum a 1'automne 1995. Si le referendum deviant
avoir lieu apres la fin de 1995, 11 faudra reexaminer 1'approche proposee.

Bureau du Conseil prive

La demarche du gouvernement du Qudbec a un impact sur le climat des relations federales-
provinciales. Ces relations etant plus difficiles a gerer, la charge de travail du Bureau du
Conseil prive, des Affaires gouvernementales en particulier, a beaucoup augmentde.

Le 4 novembre 1993, 1'honorable Marcel Masse etait nomme president du Conseil prive de
la Reine pour le Canada, ministre des Affaires intergouvernementales et ministre charge du
Renouveau de la fonction publique. Soucieux de seconder le Ministre dans 1'exercice de ses
diverses responsabilites, le BCP a demande des ressources supplementaires deviant servir a
des fonctions ministdrielles nouvelles et accrues (C.T. 821150, le 17 fdvrier 1994). Les
ressources obtenues ont dtd principalement affectdes aux secteurs d'activitd suivants
Secretariat du Rnouveau du gouvernement; Affaires intergouvernementales; Examen des
programmes; Communications et Consultation; prestation de services de secretariat
suppldmentaires au Ministre a 1'appui de ses responsabilites liees au Renouveau de la
fonction publique et a 1'Administration.

Le 22 fevrier 1995, le Premier minstre annongait la nomination de Phonorable Lucienne
Robillard au poste de ministre responsable de la campagne federale au cours du prochain
referendum au Quebec. La ministre est chagee de definir la position du gouvernement pour
ce qui concerne les diverses questions soulevees dans le cadre du debat referendaire au
Quebec et les questions lides a l'unite nationale dans toutes les autres regions du pays.

PAGE 20

2005-05-02T11:12:00.000-07:00

Le Bureau du Conseil prive va seconder Mm` Robillard a ce titre. 11 va aussi fournir une
aide et un'sou_ tien accrus au Premier ministre et au ministre Masse pour tout ce qui concerne
les politiques et communications federales liees aux relations federales-provinciales et a la
gestion de la federation. Une somme suppldmentaire de cinq millions de dollars est requise
pour financer les initiatives nouvelles et accrues tides a la promotion de 1'unite canadienne
pendant la period° prereferendaire et referendaire. Ces ressources permettront de soutenir le
solide noyau de hauts fonctionnaires dont on a besoin pour superviser la planification, la
documentation et 1'elaboration de la position du gouvernement federal, et la preparation
d'analyseS sur-'1 mpact eve"rituel de la situation politique sur toutes les regions du pays, les
groupes finteret, etc

Le Secretariat de 1'dlaboration des politiques et des affaires constitutionnelles renforcera sa
capacitd de traiter les questions de portee gouvernementale, de plus en plus complexes,
touchant la planification et les politiques strategiques liees a 1'evolution de la federation et a
la gestion des relations federales-provinciales pendant la period° prereferendaire et
referendaire. 11 produira en outre des analyses approfondies et des documents d'information
sur des questions connexes, ainsi que des analyses et des commentaires sur les etudes de plus
en plus nombreuses que des universitaires consacreront au ddbat. Ces activites viendront
appuyer les efforts du gouvernement visant a renforcer la valeur du federalism° evolutif.

La Division de la planification stratdgique et de la liaison collaborera avec des organismes
non aouvernementaux en ewe de renforcer et de promouvoir 1'unite du pays au Quebec et
dans le rest° du Canada a 1'appui des activites du Ministre et du Premier ministre a
1'exterieur.

La Division des communications sera charge° de 1'elaboration et de la mise en oeuvre de la
strategie federate en matiere de communications, de 1'analyse des medias, de la redaction de
discours. des services de revision, de traduction, d'impression et de distribution, ainsi que
des acti% ites administratives. Elle devra peut-We etablir a cette fin une prdsence regional°
plus fore de fawn que les activites touchant les medias et la publicite puissent We
accomplies dans les ddlais voulus. Elle devra aussi collaborer avec divers ministeres et
organismes interesses afin de coordonner 1'ensemble des communications touchant 1'unite
nationals.

Travaux publics et Services izouvemementaux Canada

Sous la direction du Bureau du Conseil prive, Travaux publics et Services gouvernementaux
Canada •outiendront la publicite et la recherche sur 1'opiruon publique a 1'appui de
1'initiative.

Sous 1'impulsion du Bureau :iu Conseil prive, le Secteur de la publicite et de la rechercye sur
1'opinion publique (SPROP) coordonnera le travail des cinq organismes affectes a ce dossier. 11
veillera a ce que les services de creation et les °spaces achetes dans les medias soient conformes

PAGE 21

2005-05-02T11:01:00.000-07:00

aux politiques et lignes directrices du Conseil du Tresor et a ce qu'ils procurent une valeur
ajoutde a la Couronne. 11 veillera de plus a ce que tous les services de communication, y
compris la publicite et la recherche sur 1'opinion publique, soient concurrentiels et que les
contrau voulus soient attribues par la suite.

Les resources seront reparties entre les trois secteurs suivants

recherche sur 1'opinion publique (y compris aupres de groupes cibles);

extension des achats dans les rnedias pour les campagnes existantes ou les campagnes
mises au point par des ministeres et/ou les campagnes connexes menses par d'autres;

achat d'espaces ou de temps dans les medias pour d'autres campagnes publicitaires
gouvernementales (coots de production et d'impression compris, au besoin).

Patrimoine canadien

L'identitd canadienne repose sur 1'acceptation des diffdrences et sur des prineipes de
toldrance solidement ancrds. Sont toutefois appatus sur la scene nationale des partis
regionaux qui s'opposent ouvertement a un certain nombre de politiques fdddrales, dont la
politique linguistique et le multicultural isme. Cette situation fait que les programmes du
multiculturalisme, des etudes canadiennes et des langues officielles du ministere du
Patrimoine canadien sont beaucoup plus visibles et demandes.

11 sera essentiel cette annde de crder et de maintenir une forte coalition de partenaires et des
reseaux de soutien formes de Canadiens de toutes les regions du pays et de tous les secteurs
de ,la socidte. Le ministere du Patrimoine canadien continuera d'aider des tiers a promouvoir
1'identi.te canadienne dans leur secteur d'activitd respectif. De plus, Patrimoine canadien
continuera a fournir un soutien technique a divers ministeres fdddraux (discours, documents
de travail, etc.) et de l' information a des organismes et porte-parole interesses; il facilitera
aussi la coordination d'activites de divers groupes et rdseaux dans toutes les regions du pays.
Ces activitds seront menses dans le cadre des initiatives fdddrales dirigees et coordonndes par
le Bureau du Conseil privd.

Les divers partenaires et porte-parole qui recevront une aide financiere et/ou technique grace
a ces nouveaux credits devront se manifester publiquement. Ainsi, ils seront invitds, par
toutes sortes d'activites, a louer les mdrites d'un Canada uni et a repliquer a ceux qui
s'opposent a un pays multiculturel et bilingue et, de maniere plus generale, a cerner et a
mettre en valeur differents aspects de 1'identitd canadienne.

Documents Previously released Document dejb comuriqu6

under )q.- ~ppy-OaV0 j en vertu de la Loi sur

PAGE 22

2005-05-02T10:36:00.000-07:00

THE TREASURY BOARD
DECISION OF THE TREASURY BOARD
MEETING OF OCTOBER 19,1995

T.B., 823393

TO: Mr. RANALD A. Quail
deputy minister::
Public Works and Government
Services

SUjECT Resourses to Suppcrt
Canadian Unity

Treasury board approved the request
of che Prime Minister and the
Ministers cf Public Works and
government Services And Canadian
Heritage fcr the inclusion of an item
of up to $5,000,000 in 1995-96
Supplementary/ estimates as well as
other related authorities to promote
Canadian Unity in the period leading
to the referendum to he held in
Quebec.

More specifically, in regard to the
Department of Public Works and
Government Services, ministers
approved zhe following:

the inclusion of an item of up to
$1,500,000 in 1995-96.
Supplementary Estimates chargeable
tc Public Wcrks and.Government
Services Vote 20 - Supply and
Services Program to fund

fund Canadian
Unity-related advertiseing and
public opinion research
activities; and

PAGE 23

2005-05-02T03:35:00.000-07:00

THE CREATIVE SERVICES AND "MEDIA
BUY" ACTIONS PROVIDED FROM THESE
FUNDS ARE TO CONFORM WITH THE
ESTABLISHED TREASURY BOARD POLICY
AND GUIDELINES AND PROVIDE ADDED
VALUE TO THE CROWN.

PAUL THIBAULT
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
PROGRAM BRANCH

COMMENT: ADDED VALUE TO THE CROWN: I ALREADY REPORTED TO YOU 5 YEARS AGO THAT
QUEEN ELIZABETH HAD 12 BILLION IN HER UNION BANK OF SWITZERLAND ACCOUNT AND PRINCE PHILLIP HAD 11 BILLION. THE CROWN DOES NOT NEED ANY MORE STOLEN MONEY FROM CANADA.
THE THIEVES SHALL BE PUT IN JAIL. HOW MANY CHILDREN DIED FOR LACK OF THAT 23 BILLION.

PAGE 24

2005-05-02T03:18:00.000-07:00

THE TREASURY BOARD
OCT 26,1995
EXTRACT FROM THE MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE TREASURY BOARD
OF CANADA
ON OCTOBER 19,1995
T.B. 823393

COMMUNICATIONS

THE BOARD APPROVES AN ALLOTMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $3,500,000 FROM TREASURY
BOARD VOTE 5 " GOVERNMENT CONTINGENCIES"
OF THE ESTIMATES FOR 1995-96 FOR
THE PAYMENT OF GRANTS

THE ALLOTMENT WILL BE CANCELLED UPON THE
RELEASE OF SUPPLY COVERING SUPPLEMENTARY
ESTIMATES FOR 1995-96

PAUL THIBAULT
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
PROGRAM BRANCH

HPK/1995 10 25

comment: see how easy it is to get a grant. who got the cash.
did this start in 1867?

BLOG 8 PROCEDURE FOR TAX THEFT 25 PAGES PAGE 1

2005-04-30T13:44:00.000-07:00

Government Gouvernement
of Canada du Canada

NOTE DE SERVICE

Mr. J.C. Stobbe
Assistant Deputy Minister
Government Operational Services Branch

SECURITY - CLASSIFICATION - DE SECURITE
OUR FILE - NOTRE RtFtRENCE

YOUR FILE - VOTRE REFERENCE

Director General

` Advertising and Public Opinion Research Sector

DATE

1995-12-18

UBJECT RESOURCES TO SUPPORT CANADIAN UNITY
BJET

Following Treasury Board approval of the $11,500,000 items in th 1995-1996 .
Supplementary Estimates chargeable to Public Works and Government Services Vote 20-
Supply and Services Program to fund Canadian Unity-related advertising and public
opinion research activities, you will find enclosed the detailed report of expenditures.

. Should you need additional information, do not hesitate to contact me at 995-1427.

Urig16al -Signed by

J. C. GUITE

Encl.

BLOG 7 COFFIN COMMUNICATIONS SPONSORSHIP PAYOFFS

2005-04-30T13:25:00.000-07:00

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 1998/99

COMPANY NAME

INV. NO.' INV. DATE. T AMOUNT I CpFS A/P ID SUPPLIER CONTRACT NO GST
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 649 , 05-Feb-1999 5,473.05 130821 01BLZR EN771-8-0065 5,115.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 650 05-Feb-1999 13,976.87 130827 01BLZR EN771-8-0039 13,062.50
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 651 05-Feb-1999 7,867.83 130841 01BLZR EN771-8-0014 17,587.50
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) OLD YEAR 652 22-Apr-1999 10,099.02 PAYE 01BLZR EN771-8-0049 12,099.02
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 653 24-Feb-1999 23,968.00 143932 01BLZR EN771-8-0049 22,400.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 654 24-Feb-1999 4,590.30 143925 01BLZR EN771-8-0039 4,290.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 655 02-Mar-1999 11,114.63 143927 01BLZR EN771-8-0039 10,387.50
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 656 02-Mar-1999 3,177.90 143930 01BLZR EN771-8-0049 2,970.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 657 10-Mar-1999 10,650.31 143931 01BLZR EN771-8-0065 9,953.56
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 658 10-Mar-1999 16,448.57 143830 01BLZR EN771-8-0014 19,662.50
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 659 10-Mar-1999 10,681.00 143840 01BLZR EN771-8-0014 13,282.55
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 660 29-Mar-1999 12,240.80 151308 01BLZR EN771-8-0023 11,440.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 661 29-Mar-1999 16,812.37 150356 01BLZR EN771-8-0014 15,712.50
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 664 29-Mar-1999 21,269.67 150322 01BLZR EN771-8-0039 19,878.20
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) OLD YEAR 665 22-Apr-1999 10,477.98 PAYE 01BLZR EN771-8-0014 9,792.50
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) OLD YEAR \ 666 22-Apr-1999 3,089.63 PAYE 01BLZR EN771-8-0065 3,089.63
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) OLD YEAR 667 22-Apr-1999 26,752.14 PAYE 01BLZR EN771-8-0039 25,002.00
COMPART EVENT MANAGEMENT TIBS NOT POSTED APRIL 21 21-Apr-1998 3,920.39 24949 OVP578
COMPART EVENT MANAGEMENT TIBS NOT POSTED MAY 8 08-May-1998 424.93 25649 OVP578
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS (APORS) PAYE 13179 23-Mar-1998 140,530.00 29318 01BPlT EN771-7-0106 122,200.00
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS (APORS) 13233 20-May-1998 446,481.75 11736 01BPlT EN771-8-0022 388,245.00
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS (APORS) 13243 08-Jun-1998 51,888.00 29331 01BP1T EN771-8-0004 45,120.00
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS (APORS) 13252 30-Jun-1998 6,900.00 42894 01BPlT EN771-8-0004 6,000.00
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS (APORS) 13253 30-Jun-1998 16,640.50 42897 01BPlT EN771-8-0016 14,470.00
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS (APORS) 13254 30-Jun-1998 9,803.75 42857 01BPlT EN771-8-0004 8,525.00
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS (APORS) 13255 30-Jun-1998 17,020.00 42895 01BPlT EN771-8-0016 14,800.00
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS (APORS) 13256 30-Jun-1998 40,250.00 42896 01BPlT EN771-8-0016 35,000.00
COMPASS COMMUNICATIONS (APORS) 13258 30-Jun-1998 32,602.50 42898 01BPlT EN771-8-0016

BLOG 6 COMMUNICATIONS COFFIN ETC 340/41 ETC

2005-04-30T13:12:00.000-07:00

COMFANYN; M- - IN Y,-NO. INV. DATE AMOUNT - I GDFS A/P ID SUPPLIER CONTRACT ~ NO GST
COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRAF " N18253 11-Sep-1998 1,347.43 81964 OOJ278 EN411-8-0088 1,347.43
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 572 17-Mar-1998 2,247.00 3127 01BLZR EN771-7-0130 2,100.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 582 15-Apr-1998 6,402.24 3129 01BLZR EN771-7-0028 5,983.40
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 583 15-Apr-1998 13,773.57 3128 01BLZR EN771-7-0028 12,872.50
rn:nni INlr..ATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 584 15-Apr-1998 4,681.25 3131 01BLZR EN771-7-0028 4,375.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 585 15-Apr-1998 15,426.73 3130 01BLZR EN771-7-0028 14,417.50
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 586 15-Apr-1998 9,790.50 3126 01BLZR EN771-7-0105 9,150.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 587 08-May-1998 17,178.95 11669 01BLZR EN771-7-0105 16,055.09
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 588 08-May-1998 7,752.84 15704 01BLZR EN771-7-0028 7,245.65
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 589 08-May-1998 19,071.65 11675 01BLZR EN771-7-0028 17,823.97
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 591 13-May-1998 8,900.00 11717 01BLZR EN771-7-0105 8,900.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 597 11-Jun-1998 23,945.23 29872 01BLZR EN771-7-0105 22,378.72
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) PAYE 598 11-Jun-1998 14,311.25 25392 01BLZR EN771-7-0028 13,375.00
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 599 25-Jun-1998 28,189.15 29874 01BLZR EN771-8-0014 ' 7,672.50
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 600 25-Jun-1998 18,818.62 29869 01BLZR EN771-8-0014 14,462.63
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 601 04-Aug-1998 21,038.88 54106 01BLZR EN771-8-0014 11,431.27
COMMUNICATION COFFIN (APORS) 602 04-Aug-1998 28,740.20 54105 01BLZR EN771-8-0014 7,012.50

BLOG 5 HOUSE OF COMMONS AND GOVERNMENT JUSTICE ETC ON THE TAKE

2005-04-30T12:57:00.000-07:00

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 1998/99

_COMPANY NAME INV. NO. INV. DATE L AMOUNT j CDFS A/P ID SUPPLIER
GOVERNMENT FINANCE CANADA 0090001984 29-Mar-1999 50,000.00 151370 OW0352
GOVERNMENT FISHERIES AND OCEANS 60002394 15-Feb-1999 46,595.00 144550 01Z4TB
GOVERNMENT FOREIGN AFFAIRS & INTERNATIONAL TRADE PAYMENT REQ 19-Apr-1999 11,550.00 159997 OW0359
I NTRA 0050
GOVERNMENT HEALTH CANADA (ROYALTIES) 19 MARCH 19-Mar-1999 3,544.08 157849 OWP559
GOVERNMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS B9904 08-Jun-1998 19,028.77 24705 01Z1YT
GOVERNMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS B9911 14-Jul-1998 13,319.86 59869 01Z1YT
GOVERNMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS B9933 22-Sep-1998 15,333.07 78020 01Z1YT
GOVERNMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS B9941 06-Oct-1998 20,646.68 78021 01Z1YT
GOVERNMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS B9960 16-Dec-1998 20,760.92 117995 01Z1YT
GOVERNMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS B9973 25-Feb-1999 29,457.17 138661 01Z1YT
GOVERNMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS ? FEB/99 14,550.37 PAYE 01Z1YT
GOVERNMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS ? MAR/99 20,780.07 PAYE 01Z1YT
GOVERNMENT HRDC 9807/00012 12-Jul-1998 14,212.65 67516 OV0277
GOVERNMENT HRDC OLD YEAR PAYMENT REQ 22-Apr-1999 15,196.20 162270 OV0277
GOVERNMENT INDIAN & NORTHERN AFFAIRS RIM 1106 980613 26-Feb-1999 18,410.68 159104 OW0538
GOVERNMENT JUSTICE REQUISITION 30-Jun-1998 39,037.50 46812 OWP373
GOVERNMENT JUSTICE REQUISITION 14-Oct-1998 22,162.52 79003 OWP373
GOVERNMENT JUSTICE REQUISITION 05-Mar-1999 13,061.25 137468 OWP373
GOVERNMENT JUSTICE OLD YEAR REQUISITION 13-Apr-1999 47,351.25 156954 OWP373
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL LIBRARY OF CANADA SEMINAR 02-Nov-1998 140.00 87430 OWP442
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL LIBRARY OF CANADA SEMINAR 18-Nov-1998 140.00 87431 OWP442
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL 50096 16-Apr-1998 575.00 29423 01Z1WB
GOVERNMENT NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA GSC8180 05-Dec-1997 69.70 21879 01VELT
GOVERNMENT NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA GSC7134 17-Sep-1996 282.00 28619 01VZVE
GOVERNMENT NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA 14794 12-Dec-1998 604.65 9013-121490 OWP348
GOVERNMENT OF THE,YUKON 47TH CONFER. 10-Aug-1998 100.00 57762 OWP392
GOVERNMENT OF THE YUKON 47TH CONFER. 10-Aug-1998 100.00 5776

BLOG 4 PAGE 3497

2005-04-30T11:27:00.000-07:00

2001-2002

Supplier Name
TNC MULTICOM INC.

TNC MULTICOM INC.
TNC MULTICOM INC.
GROUPACTION

TNC MULTICOM INC. IT0081 140.04~Aff26382 ;SCENARIO DE LA JOURNEE DES MAIP

GROUPACTION 48359 - - 1 50,679.11 IAF69608 (CAPSULES RADIO-AGRO-ALIMENTAIR

50320 1 51,814.751AG60909

GROUPACTION _

CAPSULES RADIO-AGRO-ALIMENTAIA

GROUPACTION 48360 50,679.11 AF69608 !CAPSULE RADIO-ECONOMIQUES

GROUPACTION 50321 52,681.45 AG60909 ;CAPSULE RADIO-ECONOMIQUES

GROUPACTION 48361 ? 50,679.11 AF69608 I CAPSULES RADIO-HABITATION

GROUPACTION 150322 52,339.05 AG60909 ;CAPSULES RADIO-HABITATION

GROUPACTION

48362 50,679.11 AF69608 CAPSULES RADIO-ENVIRONNEMENT

50323 52,232.05 AG60909 CAPSULES RADIO-ENVIRONNEMENT

GROUPACTION

GROUPACTION 148363 44,344.22IAF69608 (CAPSULES RADIO-SANTE

GROUPACTION 50324 1 45,049.681AG60909 !CAPSULES RADIO-SANTE

GROUPACTION 48364 1 44,344.221AF69608 --(CAPSULES RADIO-PLEIN AIR

GROUPACTION 50325 11 45,450.93 G60909 (CAPSULES RADIO-PLEIN AIR

GOSSELIN RELATIONS PUBLIQUES INC QC702 8,402.30 AG17168 'MAGAZINE PRESTIGE

GOSSELIN RELATIONS PUBLIQUES INC QC792 4,596.7 G87578 !MAGAZINE PRESTIGE

LAFLEUR COMMUNICATION MARKETING 300881 24,420.55 AG15824 CENTRE (SCI - VIEUX PORT DE MONT

LAFLEUR COMMUNICATION MARKETING 301180 31,627.55 AG15824 I CENTRE (SCI -VIEUX PORT DE MONT

LAFLEUR COMMUNICATION MARKETING 301718 5,341.42,6G87587 CENTRE (SCI - VIEUX PORT DE MONT

GROUPACTION 49349 127,183.41 AF96632 (CD-ROM DESSIN ANIME

GROUPACTION 49365 G 30,291.30 AG15796 !CD-ROM DESSIN ANIME

GROUPACTION 49862 102,388.79 AG40643 ICD-ROM DESSIN ANIME

GROUPACTION 50729_ 48,292.01 'CD-ROM DESSIN ANIME

GROUPE EVEREST 6741 31,544.81 AG24745 (NHL

GROUPE EVEREST 6761 377.86 AG34138 (NHL

GROUPIE EVEREST 6764 3,387.6 AG49131 _jNHL

GOSSELIN RELATIONS PUBLIQUES INC 817-04-0402-1 1,651.18 AF58195 (PROMOTIONAL ITEMS

GOSSELIN RELATIONS PUBLIQUES INC 900-04-0402-2 52,746.02 AF69624 iPROMOTIONAL ITEMS
111,000 CHEQUES TO GO --STAY TUNED

BLOG 2 BIG TIME TAX THEFT

2005-04-30T09:34:00.000-07:00

GROUP ACTION MARKETING
ACCESS TO INFORMATION PAGE 3475
1997/98 EVENT:ALMANACH:CONTRACT EN771-7-0073:INVOICE NO:33223/97/07/17 AMOUNT $1,177,000.00 CHEQUE NO;6330837
1997/98 EVENT:ALMANACH:CONTRACT EN771-7-0073:INVOICE NO:33328/97/09/02 AMOUNT
$ 1,177,OOO.00 CHEQUE NO:6497821
1997/98 EVENT:CAPSULES RADIO CONTRACT EN771-7-0073:INVOICE NO:33328/97/09/02 AMOUNT
$1,177,000.00 CHEQUE NO:6497821
1997/98 EVENT:CAPSULES RADIO CONTRACT EN771-7-0073: INVOICE NO:33223/07/07/17 AMOUNT
$1,177,000.00 CHEQUE NO: 6330837
1997/98 EVENT SERIE D-ANNONCES IMPRIMEES CONTRACT EN771-7-0073 NO:33328/97/09/02 AMOUNT $1,177,000.00 CHEQUE NO:6330837
1997/98 EVENT SERIE D-ANNONCES IMPRIMEES CONTRACT EN771-7-0073 NO:33223/97/07/17 AMOUNT CHEQUE NO: 6497821
1997/98 EVENT SERIE D-ANNONCES IMPRIMEES CONTRACT EN771-7-0073 33223/97/07/17
$1,177,000.00 CHEQUE NO: 6330837
1997/98 EVENT SERIE DE PECHE CONTRACT NO: EN771-7-0073 NO:33328/97/09/02 AMOUNT
$1,177,000.00 CHEQUE NO:6497821
1997/98 EVENT SERIE DE PECHE CONTRACT NO: EN771-7-0073 NO:33223/97/07/17 AMOUNT
$1,177,000.00 CHEQUE NO:6330837

BLOG 1

2005-04-30T04:37:00.000-07:00

I MADE A CANADIAN ACCESS TO INFORMATION REQUEST AT A COST OF $5 CANADIAN
DOLLARS AND REQUESTED THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WITH REGARD TO THE THEFT
OF 50 TO 100 MILLION DOLLARS OF CANADIAN TAXPAYERS MONEY EACH YEAR SINCE
1995. THE NAME OF RECIPIENT THE AMOUNT OF THE CHEQUE ETC AND OBTAINED 3600
PAGES. APPROXIMATELY 111,000 CHEQUES . I WILL SHARE PAGES WITH YOU.