Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal 1 Stone Road West
Tribunal d’appel de l’agriculture, de l’alimentation et des affaires rurales 1 Stone Road West
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 4Y2 Tel: (519) 826-3433, Fax: (519) 826-4232 Email: AFRAAT@ontario.ca
Guelph (Ontario) N1G 4Y2 Tél.: (519) 826-3433, Téléc.: (519) 826-4232 Courriel: AFRAAT@ontario.ca
AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS APPEAL TRIBUNAL
APPEAL:
James Morin (RE)
James Morin (RE)
STATUTE:
Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act, 1993
HEARING:
November 20, 2019
DATE OF DECISION:
December 17, 2019
088MorinJ19
NEUTRAL CITATION:
2019 ONAFRAAT 22
IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 22 OF THE FARM REGISTRATION AND FARM ORGANIZATIONS FUNDING ACT, 1993, S.O. 1993, C. 21, S. 22(1)
AND IN THE MATTER OF: An application to the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal by James Morin of Massey, Ontario for an order under section 22(1) of the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act, 1993 that registration and payment to a farm organization under the Act be waived.
Before: Glenn Walker, Vice-Chair, Sarah Judd, Member and Lee Holling, Member
Appearances: James Morin, Applicant
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL
BACKGROUND
James Morin applied to the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal, by way of an application received by the Tribunal on July 29, 2019, for an order waiving the requirement that he register his farm with and make the prescribed payment to a farm organization on the basis of his religious conviction or belief pursuant to Section 22(1) of the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act, 1993 (“Act”). In his application he states that the grounds upon which he seeks the exemption are: “I don’t wish to lobby the Government. I do not wish to be a part of a group outside of the church which may have leadership with other inclinations, besides those commonly held by Christian people”. The Bishop Affirmation portion of the application was not completed.
In the absence of the affirmation of a bishop of a church recognized by the Tribunal as holding beliefs that would entitle church members to a religious exemption, the Tribunal ordered a hearing of the application, in accordance with Section 22(6) of the Act. The hearing was held at Sudbury, Ontario on November 20, 2019. The three accredited farm organizations, namely the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario and the National Farmers Union – Ontario were notified of the application on August 7, 2019 and did not submit any objections to the application.
THE EVIDENCE
The Tribunal received Mr. Morin’s written submissions as Exhibit Number 1 to the hearing.
Mr. Morin, age 36, and his wife and four young children live on a 160-acre farm near Massey, Ontario. He has cleared approximately 100 acres although some of this land still needs to have the stumps removed. He also rents land to farm, approximately 70 acres in 2018 and 100 acres in 2019. He grows hay and cash crops and raises Gelbvieh cattle, a German breed used for dairy and beef. These cattle are mostly sold for breeding stock.
He had a Farm Business Registration (FBR) Number in 2018 and a start-up exemption the year before. He also has an FBR Number for this year and indicated the Ontario Federation of Agriculture as his accredited farm organization of choice. After filing his FBR Number, he immediately asked for and received a refund of his payment to the accredited farm organization. His 2018 gross farm income was $8,000.
Mr. Morin has an off-farm job as a miner working on a rotation of two weeks at the mine followed by two weeks off. He works as a contractor and is not required to belong to a union. However, last year he was doing a different job at the mine and was required to join the union and pay union dues. He stated that he did not like joining the union for the same reason that he is objecting to pay money to a farm organization but was unaware that he could have applied for a religious exemption.
The family has many Mennonite friends and neighbours. He testified that he has a mutual faith with them but will never be a member of the Mennonite church or community. For example, he and his family are covered by provincial health insurance and he has home and life insurance. His oldest daughter has been granted a special privilege and attends a Mennonite school.
Mr. Morin testified that starting a farm from scratch is a losing battle and that he could not do it without his religious conviction. He believes that his Biblical convictions lead him to farm and he wants to distance himself and his family from a world that he feels is becoming more at odds with God’s Word. In his material (Exhibit Number 1) he stated: “As Canada socially progresses further away from its Judeo-Christian roots I believe that my ability to provide for my family on the Land is the only way I can physically survive while maintaining the integrity of my Faith, which is my highest priority”.
With respect to the requirement in the Act that he register with and make a payment to a farm organization, he stated in his material: “I do not want to be led by; or [sic] part of Worldly organizations that aren’t led by God fearing people, or motivated by an understanding of God’s truth”. He was not aware of the mission and focus of the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario. He does not object to registering his farm with Agricorp but objects to being part of an organization where he has no control, in other words, to put his trust in other men and women rather than to put his trust in God.
In conversations with his Mennonite friends he learned that they receive a religious exemption which prompted him to apply. He asks that he not be forced to go through the process of paying the fee and becoming a member of a farm organization and then having to ask for a refund.
THE LAW
The subsections of the Act relevant to this application are:
Section 22(1)
“If an individual carries on a farming business and objects to making payment to a farm organization or filing a farming business registration form because of his or her religious conviction or belief, the individual my apply to the Tribunal for an order that payment or filing be waived.”
Section 22(6)
“If the Tribunal is satisfied that an individual referred to in subsection (1), (2) or (3) objects to making payment to a farm organization or filing a farming business registration form because of his or her genuinely held religious conviction or belief, it shall order that payment or filing be waived.”
ANALYSIS
The issue to be decided is whether the Tribunal is satisfied that James Morin objects to making a payment to a farm organization or filing a farm business registration form because of his genuinely held religious conviction or belief.
While the case law of the Tribunal on this issue is scarce, the Tribunal can look to the case law of the Ontario Labour Relations Board where there is provision for a religious exemption from joining a union or paying union dues in Section 52 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995. From that case law the following three-pronged test can be deduced:
Are the Applicant’s convictions and beliefs genuinely held?
Are the Applicant’s convictions and beliefs religious?
Are the Applicant’s convictions and beliefs the actual cause of the objection to making a payment to a farm organization or filing a farm business registration form?
Genuinely Held
This is a subjective test and whether the conviction or belief is right or wrong, reasonable or unreasonable, is of little importance. What is important is that Mr. Morin genuinely holds these beliefs. The test is subjective from Mr. Morin’s point of view and can best be judged from the testimony of the applicant and the manner in which he explained his convictions and beliefs.
Mr. Morin gave his evidence in a straightforward and credible manner and gave the Tribunal no reason to believe that he did not genuinely hold these convictions. The Tribunal finds that he is genuine in his belief.
Religious Beliefs
Mr. Morin stated that he was not part of and would never be a member of the Mennonite church and community. Members of the Mennonite Church do receive a religious exemption if their bishop has satisfied the Tribunal that the beliefs and convictions of the church meet the requirements for an exemption. The Ontario Labour Relations Board cases have, however, affirmed that religion may be personal and need not be tied to a religious sect. However, the beliefs must still be religious in essence and not philosophical or political, for example. Where the non-religious beliefs colour the religious beliefs to the point that the Tribunal cannot ascertain which beliefs are driving the application, then the application must fail as the applicant has the onus of proof.
In his written material (Exhibit Number 1), it is clear that Mr. Morin’s disappointment (if it can be put that way) in the outside world has caused him to seek a lifestyle for he and his young family that separates and perhaps protects them from that world. While that goal is admirable, the views that support that goal are not necessarily religious. It is difficult to distinguish whether his objection to making a payment to a farm organization is religious or philosophical and therefore the Tribunal must find that he has failed to meet the onus of proof with respect to this test.
Actual Cause
What is the actual cause of Mr. Morin’s objection? The answer to that question was answered by the applicant in his final submissions when he stated that he wished the Tribunal to grant him an exemption so that he did not have to do “the extra leg work” in applying for an exemption each year.
Although the Act requires a payment to be made each year to a farm organization, Section 21(8) of the Act provides that any person who makes a payment may apply to the farm organization for a refund within the prescribed time. The prescribed time is 90 days from the day the registration is required to be filed. That date is March 1, meaning that the applicant has until May 30 in each year to apply for the refund. Making a payment to a farm organization does not make the payor a member of the organization (Section 21(11) of the Act.)
Although Mr. Morin does have strong beliefs and convictions, they are not the actual cause of the application. The real reason that the applicant wishes to have the exemption is so that he does not have to make a payment and then request a refund each year. The Tribunal finds that the applicant has failed to meet the onus on this branch of the test.
Conclusion
In order to be successful, the applicant must convince the Tribunal on all three branches of the test. He has failed to do so.
ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
The Tribunal orders that the Application of James Morin under Section 22(1) of the Act be dismissed.
Dated at Chatham, Ontario this 17th day of December 2019.