I have begun to believe my mind is full of tiny little topics that act like pimples.

No one can predict the order they start to fester in, or when they’ll get ripe and burst.

Showing posts with label Cannabis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cannabis. Show all posts

Monday, 9 February 2015

Liars, Liars, Pants on Fire

I HAVE A COMPLAINT!
You are Violating Your Oath!
Stop Lying to Your Patients.
Regain Your Integrity!


Attn; Dr. Simpson and all College Registrars

Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities
Fleur-Ange Lefebvre, Executive Director and CEO
College of Physicians and Surgeons
Registrar
Alberta
Dr. Trevor Theman
Saskatchewan
Dr. Karen Shaw
Manitoba
Dr. William Pope
Quebec
Dr. Yves Robert
New Brunswick
Dr. Ed Schollenberg
Nova Scotia
Dr. Douglas A. (Gus) Grant
Prince Edward Island
Dr. Cyril Moyse
Newfoundland and Labrador
Dr. Robert Young
Yukon
Ms. Fiona Charbonneau
Nunavut
Ms. Barbara Harvey
Ontario
Mr. Dan Faulkner


Ladies and Gentlemen: I have a Complaint:

The Medical Marijuana Policy of the CMA
 Violates its own Code of Ethics


After reviewing the history of the Medical Marijuana Program I have come to the conclusion that the Medical Profession in Canada, by their avoidance of the truth has, possibly unknowingly, committed an act of professional misconduct, in that they have engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct.

My name is Blaine Barrett and I am a Medical Marijuana Advocate and Ethical Critic residing in Surrey BC. I am 72, a concerned Senior Citizen and one of 40000 patients who were previously legally licensed to use and purchase Medical Marijuana. Since September of this year all 40,000 of us are now compelled by law to obtain a signature but cannot get a physician to sign applications for a “renewal”! I suffer from Double Depression and Neurological Pain in my back and legs. I have used Marijuana since 1999 for mental control and pain management. I only require 1-2 gr./day but when I need it I NEED it!

I obtained my first Application Form B2 signature in 2007 and since my first purchase from them I have been witness to the Harper Government’s Health Canada calculated destruction of the Medical Marijuana Access Program. The implementation of the Marihuana for Medical for Research Purposes Regulations has destroyed all patients’ ability to obtain their medication from any legal source except of the new crop of extremely expensive Licensed Producer (LP). In order for a patient to become a customer he must provide a document signed by a doctor, and that at this moment has created an insurmountable blockade for access to a legal supply of Marijuana.
We need help. There are 40,000 qualifed applicants who need a renewal.

What is most disappointing is the Canadian Medical Association’s participation in the destruction of the MMAR. They adopted a hostile Medical Marijuana Policy to act as a deterrent to their members. Ever since 2003 the CMA has stubbornly refused to comply with the MMAR policies that it finds objectionable; and has advised its members not to participate in the program by refusing to sign applications. This was an obstacle to patients that has continually increased in severity for the past 11 years and it’s all based on lies.

With the creation of the MMRP program in Sept. 2013 Health Canada changed the source of our legal supply to an LP but there still was a way to access with a doctor’s signature. That access has now been eliminated as of May 13, 2014.



May 13, 2014, six months ago, Dr. Louis Hugo Francescutti, the last president of the Canadian Medical Association made a declaration and as the head of the advocacy organization had one message for all Canadian doctors when it comes to prescribing marijuana:

“Don’t do it!”


The Deterioration of Medical Ethics
Related to Medical Marijuana

In the course of our national history, there has never been another profession more respected, admired, and trusted than the Canadian Medical Profession was in 1867. Three months after the founding of Canada, 164 Canadian Medical Professionals coalesced to form the Canadian Medical Association to serve our national health needs.

One of their first concerns was with the moral and ethical character of Physicians to ensure a continuation of the respect they held in Society. To ensure the expectations were met, they devised and adopted a Code of Ethics to cover the practice of Medicine in Canada and expand the scope of the Hippocratic Oath they all swore to honour. This was last revised in 2004 and last reviewed in Mar, 2012. It is based on the fundamental principles and values of medical ethics, especially compassion, beneficence, non-malfeasance, respect for persons, justice and accountability.

It is worthy to note that at that time physicians relied on testimonial evidence alone. With reference to Cannabis the evidence is still on hand: 5000 years of medical use with not one death or any other established harmful consequence of its use; but the CMA now opposes its use in any form. What happened to detour the CMA into a complete reversal regarding Cannabis?

There effectively was no CMA policy regarding marijuana for 100 years until the Hippy Revolution of the 1960’s raised its profile and the War on Drugs commenced. The CMA was not overly concerned about pot and prior to 2000 they were in favour of decriminalization. Then the Canadian Government passed the Medical Marihuana Access Regulations and the CMA got its nose out of joint because the Government took the position of telling them what to do and not asking for their help. Over the course of the last 11 years and 11 presidents the CMA has rigidly opposed Medical Marijuana citing three primary objections and Physicians are now obstructing the application process.

They now condemn all testimonial evidence as a pack of lies and cannabis has no medical benefit worthy of consideration? Despite 5000 years of no harm this opposition is based on three complete lies that have intentionally distorted the publics understanding of cannabis’ medical benefit.

THE TRIO OF LIES!
Violations of Ethics rule 4, 9, and 14

1.    Prescribing marijuana to a patient is a risk that exposes him to too many unknown possible detrimental effects and could harm the patient.

Over 5000 years of Testimonial evidence laud its wide range of medical benefits and supports the lack of any possible harm: not one death or consequential health problem from its use in any fashion. The CMA asserts there is no scientific basis for that conclusion and any doctor prescribing it could be legally liable for causing harm to a patient. Pure fiction! Every recipient of this complaint is fully aware that there is no legal liability related to signing an application and if there were, it is a simple matter to get a Waiver of Responsibility form for the patient to sign from your College. It’s an intentional denial and proven Cover Your Ass technique that every doctor is well aware of.

<><><><><><><><><><>

2.    There is inadequate research of any benefits from its use that are up to the acceptable standards of the CMA.

At this point these standards exclude almost all of the Global research done by the international Medical community. Any research done by any other specialty or field of practice will not be considered. Even the studies by foreign scientists of the Nobel Laureate level are intentionally ignored. At this point over 100 cannabinoids have been identified and each, or a combination result in beneficial results, but the CMA demands that each of these need to be verified as acceptable to Pharmaceutical level testing. There is more than adequate research that has been conducted in the past ten years being ignored by the CMA that proves them to be intentional liars in denial of reality.

I suggest you all bring yourselves up to date on current research and watch this documentary:

4/20 Marijuana Documentary - Cannabis Research Studies - 2014


The CMA and Health Canada are equally distortionary when it comes to the hazards of Marijuana use. Despite all the claimed hazards they have no Research Studies that meet their own CMA standards so its all Lies again.

<><><><><><><><><><>

3.    The CMA holds that Physicians who approve an application for Medical Marijuana are acting as a Gateway to more serious drug addiction and criminal behaviour.

A physician’s signature on an Application for Marijuana is deemed a Prescription by the CMA: What a line of crap. Read both the MMAR and the MMPR and neither requires a “Prescription”.

The MMAR requires a signature on a Form B1 or B2. That signature is a declaration that the symptoms displayed by an applicant are enough to warrant inclusion as a Licensee under the MMAR. The License permits the patient to purchase and possess dried marijuana from Health Canada and no place else.

The MMRP is similar in that all the doctor is doing is simply certifying that the applicant once again meets the symptom criteria for medical marijuana and the signed application serves only as authority to purchase dried marijuana from one of the new expensive Licensed Producers. It has no other power!

<><><><><><><><><><>

The three foregoing statements, as justification for the CMA’s blockade of signatures, are in direct conflict with the CMA Code of Ethics to which all physicians are required to conform. There are 53 rules and I have only cited the three most egregious violations by the Association before I deal with those of the Colleges.

As Class examples:

4. Practise the art and science of medicine competently, with     Integrity

Integrity= the most important requirement in a man of Character! Its primary and first component is Honesty!
“Risk”, “No benefit” and “Addictive”
 = Intentional, Calculated LIES!

You may not agree with that conclusion but there are 40,000 of us who believe it. They know better!

9. Refuse to participate in or support practices that violate basic human rights.

We have a Charter Right to Access our Medication.
Why are our physicians blocking the way?

The CMA opposes Parental Control of Treatment

Compare these two conflicts:

Ref: Leukemia treatment disputes reopen debate whether parents should have final say over children’s welfare


Cannabis Extract Treatment for Terminal Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia with a Philadelphia Chromosome Mutation



Why is the Medical Profession exercising its power to deny Parental Rights and forcing children into chemotherapy with all its known hazardous effects? In this instance they refuse treatment with a medication with no known serious side effects in favour of chemotherapy with a high probability of Chemo side effects:
Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting, Mouth Sores, (Mucositis), Neuropathy, Neutropenia and Infections, Diarrhea, Constipation, and Hair loss.


14. Take all reasonable steps to prevent harm to patients;

Intentional denial of access to a medication being used for symptom relief, knowing full well that this act could result in serious recurrence of symptoms, is not a reasonable step to avoid harm. Neither are Prescribing Fentanyl and Opioids with devastating known side effects and an elevated risk of death.

<><><><><><><><><><>

These three statements effectively establish that the CMA based their Marijuana Policy, on lies that are obvious to any person who values integrity and has even a minimal knowledge of Medical Marijuana use.


The Role of the Colleges

I feel betrayed by the opposition to Cannabis use as declared in CMA Official Policy. I feel further dismayed by every Canadian College of Physicians and Surgeons copying, adopting and following the CMA’s lead blindly and proliferating the three lies. All Colleges recently revised their Official Policies to add additional restrictive procedures and practices that are totally ridiculous and completely impractical. You have no idea of the complexity of the medication you are trying to regulate: these additions to policy are based on ignorance with no basis in fact.

It seems the Doctors have now taken the initiative and in return for their signature want total control of the Doctor/ Patient relationship. We have a profession that, after admitting that they have very little knowledge about any of the aspects of Medicinal Cannabis use or treatment: are demanding complete control of a patient’s treatment under threat of terminating their prescription for disobedience. That is not going to fly. You are acting prematurely and without consideration of the fact that at the current time you are only dealing with the smallest component of the patient pool by blindly following the Harper restriction of medical use to smoking dried marijuana.

For the past eleven years the medical profession has effectively watched the use of marijuana as a medication grow and made no attempt to learn anything about marijuana therapy and treatment modes. You are dealing with a patient population that for all that time was improvising and developing different methods of treatment for a large number of medical problems and 90% have abandoned smoking and developed a whole range of treatment options that you are ignoring. Depending on the problem there are oils like Phoenix Tears, Extracts, tinctures, edibles, ointments, suppositories, etc. and the majority of physicians are ignorant of any of it. 

At this point the Doctor/Patient relationship between the 40000 Medical Marijuana Qualified Patients and almost all 60000 of your CMA members is one of mistrust. Doctors view patients as potential drug addicts and liability risk and Patients view Doctors as a contemptible bunch of liars in denial of reality. We feel betrayed because we trusted you as Good Samaritans and you have just ignored our need for help for years and you are still stuck telling the same three lame lies as justification for closing your eyes to the consequences of your indifference.

Stop and Reconsider

At this point, as a profession, you are backed into a corner with no place to go. Salvage your integrity and tell the truth. Simply admit you have reassessed your position and you were wrong. Not publicly but privately to yourself and consider what I am proposing as a change in tactics that can go a long way to restoring the Doctor/Patient relationship to one of mutual trust.

At this time the profession is fixated on only Dried Marijuana as the whole problem. I doubt even 10% of the patients using Medical Marijuana do so by smoking. The majority require raw plant product as a source material for whatever personal formula they are making to treat themselves. They make oils, extracts, medibles, and salves in 1000+ differing ways and schedules of use. A lousy prescription, as you call it, for the maximum 5 grams recommended by Ottawa does absolutely nothing if the patient needs 50 pounds of raw herbal product per month for his treatment. You all know nothing about the manufacture or use of any of these products in depth and in about two years with legalization a physician’s permission will be null and void and the distrust of the 90% of users will never be destroyed.

You all need to eat some crow and show some moral fortitude and join with your patients to demand money from the liars in the Harper Government to correct your lack of knowledge. Research is necessary and attached to this Complaint you will find one possible way to deal with the problem. My proposal is called the Risk Research Assessment Project and it is attached for your consideration. I previously made this in the form of a proposal for a joint research project to Dr. Louis Francescutti after his appointment to the CMA Presidency. I was ignored as is standard practice for the CMA.
Since then I have watched the profession fester with resentment and they are now in an impossible situation making unreasonable demands that cannot be met because they have destroyed all confidence in their role as a trustworthy source of help.

I may be a fool or simply overly optimistic but I believe that there is a way to break the current impasse if only the profession will listen and understand that they need to show some humanity and understanding and above all negotiate a middle ground to establish a workable Doctor/Patient relationship in Cannabis Treatment and establish its benefit on a factual basis.

So where does that leave us now?
In a position where we can ignore Government influence and resolve the differences in goals of Doctors and Patients by partnering to a new instructional model and eliminating the shortage of information that so plagues Doctors in the assumption of the risk of treatment. To this end I now repeat the proposal I made the CMA to establish a joint Program to collect the missing information. It is far from perfect but consideration of its development into a data base of great utility in a very short time.

I would very much appreciate an acknowledgement of receipt of this Complaint and thank you in advance for any consideration you may give my proposal.

I would very much like to know your reaction and would welcome any criticism or comment you may feel free to provide as to how you collectively will proceed to correct these ethical shortcomings.
Best regards


____________
Blaine Barrett
#255, 10202-149st
Surrey BC V3R 3Z8

Thursday, 18 September 2014

LIAR! LIAR! PANTS ON FIRE!





Abbotsford Councillor Henry Braun is a Liar!
I’m Calling Him Out on It!





My E-mail to Abbotsford Council --Sept. 18, 2014

Dear Mayor Banman and Councillors:

While I would like to request that all Council members read this, it is specifically addressed to Councillor Henry Braun for what I believe is an outright lie regarding the safety hazards related to the growth of Medical Marijuana.

Councillor Braun:

This morning I read your statement as reported in the Cannabis Digest on Tuesday Sept 16, 2014 that the privacy policy of Health Canada in failing to disclose the location of Federally Licensed Medical Marijuana grow-ops is costing the City of Abbotsford and its residents “horrendous expense”.
You want all BC Municipalities to demand a change to over-rule the privacy right

You state as a matter of fact “the city has had multiple instances of homebuyers unknowingly purchasing former grow-op locations — leaving them with costly repair bills to fix tampered electrical wires and mould issues.

You sir are a LIAR!

You state two “Facts” that are either outright lies or a monstrous distortion of a minor isolated occasional problem.

I want to know what your city data base has on record to support your outrageous statements. I would like a reply from you and answers to a couple of very simple questions.

If you are telling the truth then you should be able to easily answer with a simple search of city records and come with the following clarifications:

  1. What was the “horrendous” expense to the City in Fiscal 2013?
  2. What is the “horrendous” expense” so far in 2014”
  3. How many “Multiple instances” were reported in 2013?
  4. How many “Multiple instances” were reported in 2014?

You state: “Somebody buys a house and they basically have to gut the inside of it. You’re talking $50,000”!

  1. How many multiple instance had “tampered electrical wires”?
  2. What was the average cost to repair?
  3. How many multiple instance had “mould issues”?
  4. What was the average cost to repair?
I will wait for your reply


To all you other Councillors:

As I see it Henry spoke for the Council and if he really did, you’re all as stupid and bigoted as him. Take a good look at Henry’s answers and make your own assessment of what is truth!

Best regards:

Blaine Barrett
TheSmeeGoanGuy
Medical Marijuana Advocate and Ethical Critic

Saturday, 19 July 2014

Ratfink Rona's Resume



Who Is This Bitch Rona Ambrose

She’s Damned Near Ruined Our Home


Rona Ambrose Took an Axe
Gave All Labour 40 Whacks
When She Saw What She Had Done
She Gave Health Canada 41

I never really knew a lot about Ms. Ambrose until she got involved with Medical Marijuana and set out to destroy it. I was vaguely familiar with her squelching two major strikes by Labour she didn’t like. I recently ran across this little Wikipedia summary of her backtrail: all the dead bodies she’s left behind and all the nasty insulting statements she’s made. I found this to be a new awakening as to just how good she is at enforcing her will. She’s a perfect imitation of Wonder Woman carrying her Dominatrix Gear on the hunt for her next victim. I hope you all become as disgusted as I am and helpm in obstructing her in any way possible:

Ronalee "Rona" Ambrose, PC, MP
(Born March 15, 1969) is a Canadian politician and a Member of Parliament since 2004. She serves as the Minister of Health, and Vice-Chair of the Treasury Board Cabinet committee.
In the previous Parliament, she was Canada's Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Minister of Western Economic Diversification and President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada. She has been a Conservative member of the Canadian House of Commons from Edmonton–Spruce Grove since 2004. She is a former communication consultant and public policy consultant for the Alberta government. When the Conservative party was in opposition, she served as its Intergovernmental Affairs critic.

Early life and education


Ambrose was born in Valleyview, Alberta and grew up both in Brazil and in Parkland County, Alberta. In addition to English, she also speaks fluent Portuguese and Spanish. Ambrose has a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Victoria and a Master of Arts degree in political science from the University of Alberta.

Early political career


Ambrose was first elected as a Member of Parliament in the 2004 federal election.

On February 16, 2005, she made headlines after making a remark in Parliament directed at Liberal Social Development Minister Ken Dryden saying "working women want to make their own choices, we don't need old white guys telling us what to do," in reference to the Liberal national child care plan.

Ambrose calls herself a libertarian and is a fan of Ayn Rand novels such as Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead.[1] She was a member of the Trilateral Commission, as reported in Vancouver's Georgia Straight, August 24, 2006.

Ambrose was temporarily the Conservative critic for International Trade, after the defection of Belinda Stronach to the Liberal Party.

Cabinet minister


In 2006, Ambrose successfully defended her seat in Edmonton–Spruce Grove with 66.8% of the vote in the riding. She was then appointed Environment Minister in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government. She was shuffled out of that position on January 4, 2007, and appointed Minister of Western Economic Diversification, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada.

On October 30, 2008, Rona Ambrose was shuffled to the Department of Labour.[2]

On January 19, 2010, Ambrose was appointed as the new Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada.

On July 13, 2013, she was appointed Minister of Health.

Minister of the Environment


On April 7, 2006, Ambrose announced that Canada had no chance of meeting its targets under the Kyoto Protocol and would have to set more "realistic" goals for cutting greenhouse gases. "My departmental officials and the department officials from natural resources have indicated that it is impossible, impossible for Canada to reach its Kyoto target. And let me be clear. I have been engaging with our international counterparts over the past month, and we are not the only country that is finding itself in this situation." said Ambrose.[3] On June 6, 2006, in a speech she clarified with the following: "So we became the first and only country to publicly state that we know we will not reach our Kyoto targets. This was met by controversy. But we will not be the last. However, no one that follows this debate in any serious manner was surprised to find out that after years of no action on climate change, meeting the onerous targets negotiated under the Liberals was not a reality."

On April 13, 2006, Ambrose was accused of stopping an Environment Canada scientist, Mark Tushingham, from speaking publicly about his own novel. The science fiction novel, entitled Hotter than Hell, posits an alternate future in which global warming has made many parts of the world too hot to live in and has prompted a war between Canada and the U.S. over water resources. Tushingham was scheduled to speak in Ottawa at his book launch about his book and his beliefs underpinning it. However, he claimed an order from Ambrose's office stopped him. In response, Ambrose's spokesperson claimed that the speech was billed as coming from an Environment Canada scientist, who would appear to be speaking in an official capacity, even though his book is a work of fiction.

On May 11, 2006, before the House of Commons, she said "We would have to pull every truck and car off the street, shut down every train and ground every plane to reach the Kyoto target negotiated by the Liberals."[5]

She continued her May 11 speech: "Or we could shut all the lights off in Canada tomorrow -- but that still wouldn’t be enough -- to reach our Kyoto target we’d have to shut off all the lights AND shut down the entire agriculture industry.

"Or instead we could shut down every individual Canadian household, not once, not twice, not three times, but FOUR times over to meet the Kyoto target the Liberals negotiated for Canada.

"Or, we could do what the Liberals thought was the answer faced with the realization that the target they negotiated meant shutting down Canada’s economy -- spend the money overseas buying international credits -- the Liberals had set aside up to $600 per Canadian household to be sent overseas in order to help reach the Kyoto target they negotiated for Canada."

Ambrose was criticized by Bill Graham, Leader of the Opposition, on May 15, 2006 for chairing a UN conference on climate change despite admitting that Canada will not meet its Kyoto Protocol targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Ambrose, who was leading the May 15 to 26 meetings in Bonn, Germany, repeated her claim that Canada's targets under Kyoto are "unachievable." During Question Period that day, Graham asked the prime minister if he saw the "irony" in having someone who "despises" Kyoto to chair the meeting in Germany. At the beginning of the UN conference, Ambrose stated: "I have been very honest with Canadians after the release of our greenhouse gas inventories that we will have great difficulty in meeting those targets. We believe they are unachievable.".

Ambrose told a parliamentary committee that Canada had paid its debts under the Kyoto Protocol only to have an Environment Canada official point out that the bill was still unpaid.

Continued opposition discontent over Ambrose's conduct led the NDP to table a motion in the Commons environmental committee calling for her resignation. The vote, which was held on June 21, 2006, saw the Liberals side with the Conservatives, thus defeating the motion. Had the motion passed, a vote would then have been held in the House of Commons, and, because this was deemed to be a matter of confidence, could possibly have triggered an election.

In August 2006 she stated that although the population of spotted owls in British Columbia is only 17, she does not feel they are threatened and therefore they do not merit any special protection (The Northern Spotted Owl is listed as Threatened or Endangered throughout its range in US and Canada).

On October 19, 2006, Ambrose introduced a Clean Air Act that purported to reduce the level of greenhouse emissions starting in 2020, cutting them to about half of the 2003 levels by 2050. She also introduced other regulations to industries and vehicles as well as a possible cooperation between the federal government and the provinces to create a system that would report air emissions. In an interview with the media, Ambrose denied that the Conservative government had abandoned the Kyoto Protocol despite its previous opposition to it. However, industries will have until 2010 before they are expected to reduce emissions, and the government will not have final (and voluntary) targets ready until 2020. Oil companies will have to reduce emissions on a per-barrel basis, reduction proportional to production basis.

Cabinet shuffles


News stories began to appear in late 2006 of a possible Cabinet shuffle that included shifting Ambrose from her environment portfolio. On January 4, 2007, Ambrose moved from environment to become Minister of Western Economic Diversification, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs as well as President of the Queen's Privy Council. The Environment portfolio went to John Baird, the former President of the Treasury Board. On January 19, 2010, Ambrose succeeded Christian Paradis and was named the Minister of Public Works and Government Services. On April 9, 2010 she was also named Minister responsible for the Status of Women after Helena Guergis was dismissed from Cabinet. On July 15, 2013, Ambrose was made Minister of Health and retained the title of Minister of Western Economic Diversification.

Minister responsible for the Status of Women


On September 26, 2012, Ambrose was in the news again having voted in favour of Motion 312, a motion by Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth that would have directed a Commons committee to revisit the section of the Criminal Code defining at what point human life begins. Viewing the motion as an attempt to re-open debate on abortion laws, Canadian pro-choice groups and Commons opposition parties considered her vote inconsistent with her ministerial role and prompted a call for her resignation. The motion was eventually voted down. Ambrose responded to her critics, stating her concern of discrimination against girls that is made possible by sex-selection abortion. Pro-Life groups praised Ambrose for supporting the Motion.

Honours


Ambrose has the prenomial "the Honourable" and the postnomial "PC" for life by virtue of being made a member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada on February 6, 2006.
In 2008, Ambrose was #17 on the Western Standard's "Liberty 100" top Canadian "pro-freedom activists, journalists, think-tankers and partisans."[

Blaine Barrett

Sunday, 2 March 2014

Renewal of My Complaint to Surrey City Council



Renewal of My Complaint to Surrey City Council

Do I Sound Pissed Off?

 

November 10, 2012 I e-mailed Surrey City Council some questions regarding the growth of Marijuana and the severity of the by-laws regarding its legal growth under strict supervision. It was named

An Open Letter of Complaint to Surrey’s Mayor and Council


The point of an Open Letter as set by Emile Zola with “J’Accuse” is to provoke a response from your opponent. After badgering them for only 20 weeks I finally got one Feb. 25. I was not disappointed with what I received because I have been expecting an evasion of all the questions asked. What I received was not a report with any detail or suggestions: It was a  178 word e-mail that boiled my questions down to 3 that were anwered:

1.    It’s City Policy – 3 lines – 32 words
2.    No. – 3 lines – 36 words
3.    Little use but advised location of some files.- 104 words

It is not a Reply from Council: it is a Reply from the City Solicitor.
I think I am quite correct that on receipt of my Open Letter, the clerk noted the Marijuana and automatically referred it to the Legal System where it sat. I doubt the Mayor and Councilors ever saw a copy but I think this will correct t.

I don’t get ignored and dismissed by some pompous shyster with an over-inflated self-image.



This has now turned into what will be the Publication on the Blog of me and Council having a good argument





Renewal of My Complaint to Surrey City Council

TheSmeeGoanGuy Blaine Barrett thesmeegoanguy@gmail.com

4:17 PM (1 minute ago)

to Clerks, bcc: me
Ref: Legal Services File # 3900-20-17410
In Mid- October I e-mailed Surrey City Council some questions and on the basis of advice given by phone sent them to you at
Attn: Mayor and Council
I was advised that on receipt with that Attn; Mayor and Council you would ensure that a copy was made for and sent to each individual councilor.  In early November, two weeks after submission I called and was informed my complaint had been received and a referral to Legal Services was warranted and they would advise when it had been considered.
After one month of patience and one more month of frustration and no reply to requests for information, I finally contacted the City Solicitor, Mr. MacFarlane just before Christmas and was advised he would look into it but due to his schedule requested I call back after the New Year and we could get down to details. He was reasonable, polite and seemed to understand my frustration when I vented. No problem.
We reconnected in Mid-January and talked things out. In anticipation of misunderstanding I requested a reply in writing and he agreed to supply one.
This was the beginning of dodging my request for information and refusing to contact me despite manifold requests that he do so. He received those messages via Lisa his secretary who confirmed she had relayed them all. Only after I relayed a message via Lisa that either he could contact me within one week or I was getting on the phone to Mayor Watts and raising shit did I actually get a result.
If Mr. MacFarlane had the courage and courtesy to phone me so we could have discussed his findings I would not have written this complaint.

MacFarlane, Craig

Feb 25 (3 days ago)

to me, Lisa
 Hi Mr. Barrett:
1.                In answer to your first question, regarding access to City property to campaign for the Sensible BC Referendum, it is City policy not to allow political campaigning in City recreation facilities.

The whole point was to ask Council “WHY” it was City Policy. I want to know how a Referendum qualifies as “political campaigning” and I want an argument showing how it does. I think it’s a violation of my Elections Canada qualifications and : and it is an infringement of my own personal right as a private citizen to ask a fellow citizen a question about his knowledge and provide corrective information if he requests it. There is no political identification except the advisory that there is a Referendum in process and there is no political gain.
2.               You have asked whether there will be a revision to the “Medical Marijuana Growth By-law”. In 2013, the Zoning By-law was amended to prohibit the cultivation of marijuana in all zones except the C8-B Zone.
I never asked whether there will be a revision to the “Medical Marijuana Growth By-law”. I was trying to determine if there is any way to negotiate a modification of the bylaw to permit the growth of Medical Marijuana in areas other that Zone C8-B. That is still my intention.

3.       Regarding the source of the “800 addresses as targets for surprise grow-op bylaw inspections”, I have been advised that Health Canada through our federal Freedom of Information request informed the City that 788 Health Canada licensed producers were located in Surrey but that no information was given as to the identity or location of the sites. The City does have information on the location of approximately 300 grow- ops, which information was obtained through Hydro excess consumption records and the subsequent inspections for electrical and fire safety. The City also receives information on the location of grow-ops from complaints made to the City.
This was extremely helpful in advising that No Personal information or Locations of Grow-ops has been provided by Health Canada. He was also helpful in identifying the 300 grow-op files on hand as a source of information related to all the hazards Chief Garis has concocted related to the cultivation of marijuana.
 Best regards,
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

I want to continue with a modified complaint but there is little point in doing so until I know that Council has actually received and read my initial complaint. As yet I have not received an acknowledgement of receipt from anyone except Legal Services.

I do not have a file ref for my original complaint but it can be found at

City of Surrey Legal Services File # 3900-20-17410.

I would very much appreciate that a copy of this e-mail be forwarded to all the Council with a request for an acknowledgement from each that they have received and read my initial complaint before I file a continuation. Can this be done?

Best regards
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

I Wonder what I’m Going to Get Back

?

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>