The B.C. Farm Industry Review Board (BCFIRB) completed a supervisory review of serious allegations involving the B.C. Vegetable Marketing Commission (BCVMC). The review looked into claims of bad faith and unlawful activity. It examined whether the claims were supported by evidence and what steps were needed to rebuild trust and strengthen oversight.
Why BCFIRB conducted this review
In May 2021, BCFIRB initiated a supervisory review under the Natural Products Marketing (BC) Act. The review was triggered by civil claims filed by:
- Prokam Enterprises Ltd.
- MPL BC Distributors Inc.
These companies made serious allegations against BCVMC members and staff, including claims of bad faith, bias and misfeasance in public office. These arose from disputes involving agency licensing, delivery allocation and enforcement decisions by the commission.
Given the seriousness of the allegations and their potential to undermine public confidence in BC’s regulated vegetable sector, BCFIRB initiated the review to:
- Assess what actions were required to restore trust and regulatory integrity
- Determine whether the allegations could be substantiated
What was decided
The review was completed in two phases.
Phase 1: No evidence of wrongdoing
During Phase 1, BCFIRB investigated the allegations. They found no evidence to support the serious allegations of bad faith, bias or misconduct raised by Prokam Enterprises Ltd. and MPL British Columbia Distributors Inc. They determined the claims were based on speculation, rumour and innuendo.
However, BCFIRB identified broader concerns about:
- The motivations behind the claims
- The impact on commission governance
- Potential disruption to orderly marketing
This led to Phase 2 of the review.
Decision — Allegations Review (Corrected) — July 14, 2022 (PDF, 529KB)
Phase 2: Looking deeper at intent
Phase 2 focused on whether the claims were made in bad faith and whether consequences were needed.
MPL BC Distributors Inc.
MPL withdrew its lawsuit and accepted the panel’s findings. Rather than continuing the process, it agreed to several steps to rebuild public confidence:
- Withdraw the civil lawsuit and cover defendants’ legal costs
- Pay up to $90,000 toward the commission’s legal costs from the supervisory review
- Submit quarterly reports to BCFIRB for 18 months
- Reaffirm compliance with minimum pricing, agency obligations and delivery allocation rules
- Refocus on contributing constructively to the regulated greenhouse vegetable sector
BCFIRB ended MPL’s participation in the review on January 25, 2023, with no further sanctions.
Decision — MPL Phase II Resolution — January 25, 2023 (PDF, 243KB)
Prokam Enterprises Ltd.
Prokam chose to continue defending its allegations into Phase 2. They did not provide any new or credible evidence or explanation to support their claims.
After further investigation, BCFIRB concluded that:
- Prokam acted in bad faith, advancing serious allegations without a credible foundation
- The continued pursuit of these claims was reckless and damaged public trust in the regulatory system
On March 15, 2024, BCFIRB issued the following orders:
- Delivery allocation and licensing decisions for Prokam must be handled through a transparent process before the commission
- Quarterly reporting to the commission for 24 months
- Bob Dhillon, Prokam’s principal, is barred from participating in any designated agency or receiving a producer-shipper licence for at least 24 months
BCFIRB did not recommend any legislative reform. It also had no authority to order Prokam to pay legal costs.
Decision — Prokam Phase II Outcome — March 15, 2024 (PDF, 312KB)
Review documents
These documents capture the main phases and clarification of the supervisory review.
Review notice and terms
- Notice of Supervisory Review — May 26, 2021 (PDF, 261KB)
Initiated the review and outlined the allegations, scope and interest holder participation process - Final Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure — June 18, 2021 (PDF, 285KB)
Defined the review’s scope and the procedural framework for hearings, submissions and evidence
Clarification
- Clarification Response to BCVMC — May 31, 2024 (PDF, 137KB)
Clarified how the final decision applies to future processes involving delivery allocation and licensing
Timeline of the review process
Phase 1 timeline
Distribution of notice
May 26, 2021: BCFIRB issued the Notice of Supervisory Review to Prokam Enterprises Ltd., Mastronardi Produce Ltd. (MPL) and interest holders in the regulated vegetable sector.
Participation and interim orders
June 14, 2021: BCFIRB issued decisions confirming participation and interim measures to support a fair and orderly review.
Final terms of reference and rules
June 18, 2021: BCFIRB finalized the review’s scope and rules of practice and procedure, including a structured process for document production.
Pre-hearing conference
June 30, 2021: A pre-hearing conference was held with the supervisory panel and participants to discuss logistics and next steps, including the conduct of the oral hearing.
Final rules and interim orders
July 9, 2021: BCFIRB issued the final Rules of Procedure and updated interim orders following feedback from participants.
Hearing counsel investigation
July 2021 to January 2022: Hearing counsel received submissions, conducted interviews and prepared for the oral hearing. This included document disclosure, procedural rulings and coordination with participants.
Oral hearing and decision
January 31 to February 11, 2022: The hearing was held by video conference due to COVID-19. Following the hearing, BCFIRB issued its Phase 1 decision on July 14, 2022, concluding that the allegations were unsubstantiated.
Phase 2 timeline
Planning for Phase 2
July 27 to August 25, 2022: Hearing counsel submitted recommendations for how Phase 2 should proceed. BCFIRB invited input from interest holders on the proposed approach and received written responses from all parties.
Finalizing the Phase 2 process
October 21 to November 2, 2022: BCFIRB confirmed the structure for Phase 2 through a formal decision and issued a corrigendum to clarify process expectations.
MPL resolution
January 18 to 25, 2023: MPL applied to resolve its involvement in Phase 2. After reviewing submissions from Hearing Counsel, BCVMC and BCFresh, BCFIRB accepted MPL’s commitments and ended its participation in the review.
Prokam investigation process established
March 6 to March 24, 2023: Hearing counsel proposed a schedule for the Prokam investigation. BCFIRB approved the plan, including timelines for evidence gathering and written submissions.
Proposed investigation and feedback
April 26 to June 12, 2023: Hearing counsel submitted a proposed investigation. BCFIRB invited feedback from interest holders and approved the investigation, which focused on Prokam’s motives, conduct and potential consequences.
Extensions and submission deadline
June 28 to August 21, 2023: Hearing counsel requested more time to complete the investigation. BCFIRB granted the extension and confirmed the deadline for final submissions.
Written submissions and additional evidence
October 12 to December 15, 2023: All parties submitted written arguments. BCFresh applied to submit additional evidence, which BCFIRB reviewed and ruled on. Final arguments were received from Prokam, BCFresh, BCVMC and others.
Final reply and decision
January 4 to March 15, 2024: Hearing counsel submitted a final reply. On March 15, 2024, BCFIRB issued its Phase 2 decision, concluding that Prokam acted in bad faith and ordering future licensing restrictions and oversight requirements.
Clarification request
May 10 to May 31, 2024: BCVMC requested clarification of the Phase 2 decision. BCFIRB responded, confirming the decision and explaining how it applies to future regulatory processes.
Documents related to the review
These documents show what happened during the supervisory review. They include major letters, procedural rulings, submissions and decisions.