JCT: You'll remember that I have filed an application for
judicial review of the CRTC's refusal to get me a fair share
of time from Rogers Cable TV.
Back ground can be found at my blog at
http://yahoogroups.com/group/turmel/messages/3404

Court File No: A451-07
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
BETWEEN:
John C. Turmel
Applicant
and
Canadian Radio-Television and
Telecommunications Commission
Respondent

APPLICANT'S MEMORANDUM OF FACT AND LAW

OVERVIEW:

0. Rogers Cablevision in Brantford violated the
equitableness requirements of the CRTC in refusing to
provide an equitable share of the free-time political
broadcast to a candidate for having exhibited a party logo.

PART I - STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Applicant was an independent candidate in the 2003
Ontario general election in Brant riding. Having
participated in a quarter century's worth of debates by that
time, Applicant was the only candidate who used visual aids
such as newspaper clippings, complementary currencies such
as Toronto Dollars, Guelph Greendollars, Maritimes Hours,
computer diskette, rubber ruler, etc. Like most candidates,
Applicant wears the Abolitionist Party button which is a
lapel sticker saying "LETS" for the Greencurrency Local
Employment-Trading Software. Applicant has a Royal Flush on
a tie and wears a white hard-hat saying "The Engineer" to
open and close presentations."

2. Rogers debate moderator Tim Philp didn't like the
Applicant using visual aids when the other candidates did
not and so, in the 2004 federal general election debate, he
unilaterally banned visual aids and party or personal
identification. Of course, other than party buttons, this
ban on visual aids did not affect the presentations of the
others, only Applicant's.

3. On July 21 2004, Applicant complained to the CRTC about
Rogers' interfering with candidates' presentations.

4. On Aug 11 2004, a letter from the CRTC informed Rogers of
the complaint but did nothing more about it.

5. Two more letters to the CRTC still got no response.

6. At the 2007 Ontario General Election debate for Brant
riding re-broadcast on Sep 29, Oct 6 & 8, Applicant
displayed the party button and was cut off by moderator Tim
Philp who insisted it be put down. Applicant put it on the
lapel. The moderator would not allow the continuation of the
candidate's opening statement unless it was taken off so
Applicant obeyed the fuhrer of the debate and removed it.

7. Then Tim Philp ordered the Brantford police to remove the
candidate from the debate anyway.

8. On Sep 24 2007, I complained to the CRTC demanding they
guarantee all candidates equitable time, quantitatively and
qualitatively.

9. On Sep 25 2007, the CRTC gave Rogers three weeks, after
the election date, to respond.

10. On Sep 27 2007, Rogers refused Applicant an equitable
share of time saying the ejection was not for wearing the
party button but for interrupting the next speaker who had
been told to speak after Applicant had been cut off.

11. The three extra re-broadcasts of the inequitable debate
took place.

PART II - POINT OF OBJECTION:

12. The CRTC's equitableness requirements do not make
allowance for denying candidates access for wearing a party
button.

PART III - ARGUMENT

13 Since it seemed pretty clear I could not have been
interrupting the next candidate during my 1-minute opening
statement, this is a mere false pretext for denying
equitable time for wearing the party button. Regardless,
interrupting another candidate is not sufficient cause for
not following the equitable time requirements of the CRTC,
even if it was true, which is could not have been.

14. The moderator had no right to interrupt my equitable
share of the free-time political broadcast time for the mere
display of a party decal.

PART IV - ORDER SOUGHT

Applicant seeks an Order declaring that:
a) the format of the allocation of the free-time partisan
political broadcast was inequitable.
b) wearing a party button is insufficient reason to refuse
to conform to the CRTC requirements.

Dated at Brantford on July 28 2008.

John C. Turmel, B. Eng.
8-37 Colborne St. E.,
Brantford ON N3T 2G3,
Tel/fax: 519-753-0645
Email: johnturmel@...

JCT: Those are the facts from my affidavit which the CRTC
chose not to challenge with an affidavit of their own. So
now we find out if Tim Philp get to interfere with how I
make my presentation.