STANDING COMMITTEE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT
COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES GOUVERNEMENTALES
Monday 28 April 2014 Lundi 28 avril 2014
The committee met at 1411 in committee room 2.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I’d like to call the meeting to order.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Chair?
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Just a second. I’d just like to welcome everyone first, if I may.
I’d like to welcome members of the committee from all three parties, the Clerk’s office, legislative research and Hansard as well. Today, we will be discussing the 2015 Pan/Parapan American Games and the Pan/Parapan American Games Secretariat. We do have two delegations or witnesses before us this afternoon.
Having said that, Ms. Damerla has asked for the floor.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Yes, Chair. I’d like to introduce a motion.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Go ahead.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: I move that the Clerk, in consultation with the Chair, be authorized to arrange the following with regard to Bill 171, Fighting Fraud and Reducing Automobile Insurance Rates Act, 2014.
(1) One day of public hearings on Wednesday, April 30, 2014; and one day of clause-by-clause on Monday, May 5, 2014.
(2) Advertisement on the Ontario parliamentary channel, the committee’s website and the Canadian NewsWire.
(3) Witnesses are scheduled on a first-come, first-served basis.
(4) Each witness will receive up to five minutes for their presentation, followed by nine minutes for questions from committee members.
(5) The deadline for written submission is 5 p.m. on the day of public hearings.
(6) The deadline for filing amendments with the Clerk of the Committee be at 12 noon on the Friday of the same week following public hearings.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. Discussion on the motion?
Mr. Paul Miller: This is totally inappropriate, Mr. Chairman. We’re here to discuss situations about the Pan/Parapan games. This was thrown in here at the last minute. I don’t know why. In fact, this isn’t the committee it should be going to. It should be going to the justice committee or finance committee, which is probably the ones that will be dealing with this.
Our critic is not here. This is inappropriate. I think this is an end run, it’s unacceptable, and I certainly will not be supporting that. If you do decide to go ahead with it, I’m going to certainly ask for my—when I’m entitled to breaks.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Thank you very much. Ms. Damerla.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Chair, I just wanted to point out that this committee has considered auto insurance. It worked on the report, so this is indeed the committee that has been looking at auto insurance historically. We’re happy to go for a vote on this motion, Chair.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Thank you. Do you have copies of the motion, by chance?
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Indeed.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Ms. Cansfield.
Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield: I just wanted to, for the record, just so that—it’s important that, in fact, the bill had seen eight hours of debate in the House and was referred to the Standing Committee on General Government on April 14, 2014. This is Bill 171, which is auto insurance, so it actually belongs at this committee. It’s here for public consultation and public hearings.
We sent a letter to Mr. Bisson indicating that, this afternoon, the government members of the Standing Committee on General Government would move this motion for public hearings and clause-by-clause. But it does belong at this committee.
Mr. Paul Miller: Mr. Chairman?
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. Mr. Miller.
Mr. Paul Miller: I appreciate what Ms. Cansfield said, but unfortunately, we never do this before we see the people who are here to discuss with us. It’s usually done at the end of the meeting. This is inappropriate. This is being slipped in before we’ve even dealt with the people that are here that we’re supposed to be talking to. I’ve never seen it done like that before. It’s usually done at the end. I’m fully prepared to deal with it at the end of the meeting, but not at the beginning, and this is not going to happen. If you choose to go down that road, you can vote on it, do whatever you like, but I’m entitled to my 20 minutes and I’ll be taking a few of them.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. Mr. Yurek.
Mr. Jeff Yurek: Chair, we’re willing to vote now and support this motion.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Very good. I believe we have consensus—not unanimous—to vote on the motion at this particular point. So I will call for the vote and if there’s any further discussion.
Mr. Paul Miller: Mr. Chairman, I will have some amendments. I’m not prepared to vote on it right now. We received the letter from Mr. Sousa addressed to Mr. Bisson. This is the first I’ve seen of this today. It was just handed to me an hour ago. I haven’t had time to digest it. So I will not be going ahead with this at this time, and if you are going to vote on it, I’m asking for a 20-minute recess to discuss with my House leader.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That is your privilege before a vote to request a recess.
Mr. Paul Miller: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): So if you’re requesting a recess to have discussions, that would have to receive consent from the committee. If I call for the vote, then you are entitled to a 20-minute recess prior. But then when we come back—
Mr. Paul Miller: Prior to the vote. Not after.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): —we automatically go right straight to the vote.
Mr. Paul Miller: So you can do that. Then prior to the vote, I can ask for a recess.
Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield: No.
Mr. Paul Miller: You can’t go ahead now—
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Let me clarify it again. If you’re asking for a recess right now, then we’ll need consent of the committee for that.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay, that’s fine. I’m asking for a recess. And is it appropriate that I would be able to—I’m just asking, Chairman, for direction here. Would it be appropriate for me to be able to put amendments in as well while we’re discussing the bill?
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That is always a member’s privilege.
Mr. Paul Miller: Thank you. That’s fine.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: We haven’t agreed to a recess yet.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No. Okay—
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I would need, as Chair, and an impartial Chair—I would request consent of the committee in order to have a 20-minute recess. If that is denied, then I will call for the vote, and then he’s entitled to a 20-minute recess.
Any further debate?
Mr. Paul Miller: Mr. Chair, I want to do the amendments before the vote on whether to adjourn for 20 minutes. I want to do amendments now.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Do you have an amendment right now that you would like to put on the floor?
Mr. Paul Miller: Yes. I want to change the dates for the people from the public to come in. I want to change some of the dates. But I need a 20-minute thing to discuss the changes of the dates on the amendment—
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. I’m going to ask the committee: Is there consensus for a 20-minute recess? In the event that that’s granted, then we would go through the process of allowing amendments and then calling a vote on the amendments and the recesses and things like that.
There’s no consent to a 20-minute recess at this point. What I’m going to do is, I’m going to call the vote.
Now, the other option, Mr. Miller, is that instead of a 20-minute recess, you would be entitled to request the committee for a five- or a 10-minute recess, if they would consider that as well.
Mr. Paul Miller: Whatever you feel, in your position, Mr. Chairman, that I’m entitled to for recesses, I will take.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. So it’s up to the committee, if the committee wants a recess.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: No.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): So that is denied—
Mr. Paul Miller: When do I get to put my amendments in if you call the vote?
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Right now.
Mr. Paul Miller: Right now, before the vote? You can vote on amendments after the main body of the motion, right?
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Say that one more time?
Mr. Paul Miller: You can deal with amendments after the main vote on this—
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. So I want—
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any amendments have to come; otherwise, I’m calling for the vote.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. My first amendment: Change “May 5” to “May 12,” and I’d like 20 minutes to discuss that.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): So from “May 5” to “May 12” has been the request from Mr. Miller.
Mr. Paul Miller: That’s the first amendment.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That’s the first amendment. Further debate? Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is defeated.
I shall call the vote. Those in favour?
Mr. Paul Miller: Where’s my recess? I asked for a 20-minute recess to discuss the change in the thing. You denied me a recess?
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No, I did not, sir.
Mr. Paul Miller: You did. You voted. You’re voting.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Well, I had called the vote. I said, “Those in”—
Mr. Paul Miller: No. You told me I’m entitled to—with all due respect, Chairman, you told me that I’m entitled to a 20-minute recess on my amendment, and now you’re saying I’m not.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Mr. Miller, I had indicated that I was calling for the vote. I took my time. I said, “Those in favour.” Six members of the committee put up their hands. Then I said, “Those opposed?” Then you requested the 20 minutes. So I would say you’re too late.
Mr. Paul Miller: This is totally unacceptable.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. The motion is carried.
Mr. Paul Miller: This will be reported.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): It gives me great pleasure to welcome our first deputant or presenter this afternoon. We have from the Toronto 2015 Pan Am/Parapan Am Games Organizing Committee the senior vice-president of communications, Neala Barton. Welcome, Ms. Barton. You have five minutes to make your opening statements, followed by up to 25 minutes of questioning and/or comments from the three parties, and, following that, another 10 minutes.
I’ll wish you good luck. The floor is yours.
Ms. Neala Barton: Perfect. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and committee members. I appreciate the opportunity to come to speak to you about the Toronto Pan Am and Parapan Am Games. It’s a very exciting initiative for Toronto and the greater Golden Horseshoe region.
My name is Neala Barton, and I’m the senior vice-president of communications and media relations for TO2015. I have been in this position since April 14—so exactly two weeks—so I’ll do my best to answer the committee’s questions and clarify issues to the best of my knowledge, based on the time that I’ve been in this role.
I’m extremely pleased to have the opportunity to work on these games and tell Ontario’s story. We’re planning the largest international multi-sport event ever held in Canada. The world is going to notice us, and based on what I’ve seen so far, it’s going to be impressed. I think the people of Ontario will be, too. The impact of these games will last for decades in this province.
As you might know, I recently moved back to Ontario from Alberta. When I moved to Alberta, it didn’t take long for me to understand that Calgary is still benefitting from having hosted the Olympics almost three decades ago. The venues built for those games are still used for training by top Canadian winter athletes. The oval there is still known as the fastest ice on earth for speed skaters.
Not only does Calgary have the facilities, it has the expertise, and that expertise was gained by people who volunteered and worked at the 1988 games. People seek out Calgary as a place to train because they have the facilities and the skills to share. Now, we’re building the same foundation for summer sport here in Ontario, and that will have an impact for generations.
Sport has an amazing way of binding people and communities together, and I have been so lucky to see and experience that first-hand in my life. Whether it was the time I spent as a high school sports enthusiast, as a sports camp counsellor in Ottawa, as a volunteer high school basketball coach or as a local reporter in Edmonton covering the Oilers in the Stanley Cup finals, I’ve seen the positive changes sport can bring to the young people in this province, to their families and to the neighbourhoods and communities where they live.
Because of what I’ve seen, I don’t think you can only measure the true potential impact of these games in terms of dollars and cents, because there will be countless benefits that are impossible to quantify. Whether it’s a 10-year-old who decides to take up volleyball because she watched it at the games; a Canadian athlete who gets to qualify for the Olympics in front of his family; or two volunteers who meet on the job and become friends for life, there will be thousands of stories like those that shape the legacy of these games.
My job at T02015 is to help tell these stories, to make sure people know how to make the most of these games in their communities, and to spread the excitement of hosting this once-in-a-lifetime celebration of sport and culture throughout Ontario and Canada.
In closing, while I’m new to the job, I am tremendously excited about the road ahead. I look forward to helping T02015 deliver the games in a way that all Ontarians and Ontario taxpayers can be proud of.
Thank you. I’d be happy to take your questions.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. I believe the witness is here at the request of the third party, the NDP. Mr. Miller, you can begin with your 25-minute line of questioning.
Mr. Paul Miller: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll try to be easy on you, even though they upset me.
Ms. Neala Barton: Thank you.
Mr. Paul Miller: Actually, Ms. Barton, can you tell me how you got your position with former health minister David Caplan? How did you get that job?
Ms. Neala Barton: I believe I was looking for opportunities on the political side at that point. I was a bureaucrat in Cabinet Office on a short contract. I was keen to pursue politics because I thought it was a great way to make a difference, and I was very interested in health.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. Do you have any family or a professional relationship with David Peterson?
Ms. Neala Barton: No.
Mr. Paul Miller: You don’t know him at all?
Ms. Neala Barton: I hadn’t met him until last week.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. Great. Can you tell me how you found out about the job opening for your current position?
Ms. Neala Barton: Yes. I was approached about the position back in February and then had some ongoing discussions—
Mr. Paul Miller: You were approached?
Ms. Neala Barton: Yes.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. Were you hired by Ian Troop or Saäd Rafi?
Ms. Neala Barton: Saäd Rafi, yes.
Mr. Paul Miller: So he approached you.
Ms. Neala Barton: Yes.
Mr. Paul Miller: He would be the man that approached you. Did you have any previous relationship with either Ian Troop or Saäd?
Ms. Neala Barton: Not with Ian. Saäd certainly—
Mr. Paul Miller: Worked with you in the—
Ms. Neala Barton: He was Deputy Minister of Health when I worked for—
Mr. Paul Miller: So he worked with you and David Caplan in that ministry.
Ms. Neala Barton: He was not deputy for David Caplan. He was deputy for Deb Matthews.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. How did the interview process go? What did you bring to the table and what interested them to pick you, being a former employee of that ministry?
Ms. Neala Barton: Well, I think it really came down to my experience and what they needed to find for TO2015. Obviously, we have a very short but long road ahead, if I can be so clear, in the sense that we have a lot to do in a very short period of time, so a lot to work through, a lot of potentially complicated communications challenges, a lot of big initiatives to announce in the Toronto region and the Golden Horseshoe region, where I have media contacts and I have handled some high-profile situations from a media perspective and a communications perspective.
Mr. Paul Miller: So on the system to choose a candidate, obviously you wouldn’t be exposed to anyone else who had applied. You’d have your own personal interview. Do you feel there was any leaning towards you because of your political connection in the past?
Ms. Neala Barton: Oh, no.
Mr. Paul Miller: You don’t feel that that that played a role? It was on your expertise and your many years of experience. Is that what it was?
Ms. Neala Barton: Well, the reality is, I can’t help the fact that I did work in politics before taking this job, so that is—
Mr. Paul Miller: No. So was your expertise and your experience in the field?
Ms. Neala Barton: I certainly have been able to deal with some complex communications issues in my time in government.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. Are you aware of either of your previous bosses, Dalton McGuinty or Alison Redford, contacting Saäd or David Peterson to bring your name forward?
Ms. Neala Barton: I’m not.
Mr. Paul Miller: He contacted you directly with no—you weren’t aware of them stepping up to the plate, so to speak.
Ms. Neala Barton: No.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. That’s good. In your current position, your hiring seems to coincide with increased scrutiny and media coverage of the government’s handling of the Pan/Parapan games. Was there a specific issue or reason you were brought into this role at this time? Is there something they felt you could do to—how would I say this politely—soften the blow?
Ms. Neala Barton: I can’t say specifically anything around that. I can say certainly that my understanding is that I was approached for my communications experience and the fact that there are a number of things that we have to roll out over the next year. That’s where my focus will lie. There’s a fantastic story to be told about the Pan Am Games. Certainly we’ll all, around this table, hear more about it in the coming months and coming year. I was brought in to help communicate that story.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. While reading through the boxes of the Pan Am Games files, which I’ve been doing and my staff have been doing, it is clear that the government is worried about any negative media coverage of the games. Market research, media scans and social media analysis are all highlighted in ministerial briefings, which I and my staff have read. How frequently do you use private companies for media monitoring and market research?
Ms. Neala Barton: In this role, I’m not entirely sure. I haven’t been briefed on any of our private company involvement. I know we certainly would have some private companies who would work with the games based on contracts that would have—
Mr. Paul Miller: And how long have you been in this role?
Ms. Neala Barton: Two weeks.
Mr. Paul Miller: And they haven’t briefed you at all on any of that?
Ms. Neala Barton: I know certainly we would have someone monitoring social media. I’m aware of a company that would do that. Beyond that, I can’t speak in great detail about what services we use.
Mr. Paul Miller: Wow. The games are only, what, 15 months away? Fourteen?
How often are you briefed on the issues that are ongoing?
Ms. Neala Barton: I received a high-level briefing when I arrived about some of the issues that are ongoing. Certainly I know what I’ve read through the news. But really, my focus for the last two weeks has been getting up to speed in the organization, meeting my staff, spending time with them, getting to know my colleagues and what I’m supposed to be there to deliver.
Mr. Paul Miller: Could you tell us how much is being spent on monitoring media coverage of the games?
Ms. Neala Barton: I don’t have that figure. I’m sorry.
Mr. Paul Miller: Could you get that for me, please? And whose initiative is this, to spend money on monitoring media coverage of the Pan Am Games? Whose idea was that?
Ms. Neala Barton: I wouldn’t have been there when they contracted that out or—
Mr. Paul Miller: But they did contract it out?
Ms. Neala Barton: I don’t know. Beyond social media, I can’t speak to that in great detail.
Mr. Paul Miller: Well, it’s my understanding they did, and I’d like to know who they hired to monitor media coverage of the Pan Am Games, how they can deal with issues that crop up, and whose initiative it is. So if you can find out who did that, I’d appreciate that. That’s on record.
How much of your personal time is spent monitoring the media?
Ms. Neala Barton: At this point, very little.
Mr. Paul Miller: Will it take a good part of your time?
Ms. Neala Barton: Well, certainly, for my job, I have to understand what’s happening in the media, not just around Pan Am, but across Toronto and across the GTHA, across Canada.
Mr. Paul Miller: Will you have any decision-making or preference or direction to what private media companies could be or will be hired to deal with this specific issue I brought forward? Will you be in the process to choose those ones that you may have dealt with in the past or you may know or have been friendly to the government? Would you know anything of that?
Ms. Neala Barton: I wouldn’t, no. I assume anything that we would procure would go through an open and competitive process.
Mr. Paul Miller: Given the increasing cost of the games and the climbing provincial deficit, does the minister think this is an appropriate use of taxpayers’ dollars?
Ms. Neala Barton: The Minister of Tourism?
Mr. Paul Miller: Yes, the Pan Am minister.
Ms. Neala Barton: I haven’t had any interaction with him directly.
Mr. Paul Miller: You’ve had no interaction with the deputy minister?
Ms. Neala Barton: I’ve met him, but we haven’t spoken directly about media monitoring.
Mr. Paul Miller: Creating interest: Given that at the time of the Pan/Parapan Games, the GTHA residents will also be able to view, at the time—as you know, there will be ongoing major league baseball, the Blue Jays, major league soccer, and probably a wide array of other outdoor sports that are ongoing. Is there any concern about creating interest to both sell tickets and attract corporate sponsors to Pan Am when they’re already sponsoring maybe those other professional teams? Is that going to be a challenge for you, to get money?
Ms. Neala Barton: I don’t know that it’s been a challenge so far. I do know that we are going to continue to work hard to make sure people are aware of the games. We launched our volunteer recruitment initiative just before I started, about a week before I started, actually, and so far we’ve seen more than 11,000 people step up and put their name forward to indicate interest in volunteering. That was a tremendous interest in a very short time. So judging by that interest, I would say that we’re well positioned when it comes to selling tickets.
Mr. Paul Miller: Athletics Canada spokesman Mat Gentes states that, “Toronto is a great market, but for some reason track and field has difficulty surviving there.... But things get lost in Toronto. There’s a lot of pro sports, a lot of options for people and it’s hard to differentiate yourself.” But I know that track and field plays a huge role in the Pan Am/Parapan Games.
Do you feel that there’s going to be—they wanted to run one, actually, an all-Canadian event, this year in Toronto, and it got cancelled for lack of funding. Through the development of our athletes to get them into the Pan/Parapan games, do you feel this would—they’ve run it for three years. This would have been the fourth year for their track and field meet for all different levels, and obviously they had to cancel. Is that because of the Pan/Parapan games and the lack of funding from the ministry, do you believe? Or is it because the focus has been on the Pan/Parapan?
Ms. Neala Barton: I wouldn’t be in a position to speak to that, as I wouldn’t be aware of the details about why that event is or is not going forward. I do know that we’re very excited about the opportunities for track and field athletes.
Mr. Paul Miller: Well, I’m excited too, but I just want to make sure that it doesn’t end up on the shoulders of the taxpayer of Ontario. As I’ve stated in the past, I personally have, over the years—I’m giving my age now, but I saw what happened in Montreal and I certainly was well aware of what went on there. There were some problems in Vancouver. Calgary—there were some legacy problems there, too. They still have good venues there, but they’ve had some problems. And some of the venues that were left after the Olympics in Montreal actually are boarded up and there are weeds growing all over the place.
Do you feel that overall, we can be very excited about the games? I certainly would love them to be successful and bring in the tourism. But remember, it’s only a few weeks. Do you have any fear, in your marketing skills or your corporate outreach, that you will be able to maintain an ongoing legacy with these venues after the games?
Ms. Neala Barton: I think people are already very excited about the ongoing legacy after the games. If you look at the cycling community, for example, that velodrome is going to become the second place in North America where they can train. It means Canadians won’t have to go down to the United States to get their training. I know that community is tremendously excited about having that piece of infrastructure in place. I know there’s also a legacy fund associated with three of those pieces of infrastructure that’s going to allow us to continue and bring those events to Ontario. That means sport tourism for Ontario, which is a great thing, and it means opportunities for athletes to stay home and train where they’re close to family.
Mr. Paul Miller: My concern is that after the games are over, the municipalities, whether it be the stadium in Hamilton, the velodrome—as you mentioned, very nice, but how much use it’ll get we’ll see, and whether the athletes are prepared to come here or they will build their own facilities, which they did in London. They have built other venues where they’ve had Pan/Parapan and Olympic stages. They’ve done that. So it may be one of two in North America. Hopefully the athletes—because not all of North America will be enough to maintain that on a yearly basis. I hope that the local bike clubs and things get access to that and not just the high-level athletes. The people who pay the taxes should be entitled to use those venues as well, and I hope they’re moving in that direction.
Basically, I’m surprised. I must be frank: I’m a little surprised they brought you in all the way from out west. You had left the province, got another job and they brought you back. I wish you all the best. It’s an interesting development. We’ll certainly be keeping an eye on what happens. Hopefully you fill your role to your upmost and we have a successful games. We certainly appreciate you coming in and travelling that far to—well, you’re back now.
Ms. Neala Barton: I’m back now.
Mr. Paul Miller: You’re back now to deal with these issues. Thank you for your time.
Ms. Neala Barton: Thank you very much for your questions.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you, Mr. Miller. We’ll move to the government. Ms. Damerla.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Thank you, Ms. Barton, for coming. We will have no questions. Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. We’ll move to the official opposition. Mr. Jackson?
Mr. Rod Jackson: Thank you for coming today. I know you’re very busy and taking time out of your day to talk to us. It’s much appreciated.
Ms. Neala Barton: Thank you for having me.
Mr. Rod Jackson: I have only a couple of short questions for you; I may have some follow-up. The first is that you mentioned earlier to Mr. Miller that they approached you. You were approached by Mr. Rafi—were you?—to apply for the job.
Ms. Neala Barton: Yes.
Mr. Rod Jackson: So you came in the midst of a time of some fair change at TO2015, which tells me that if they’re after you and had a specific goal in mind for you, something that they wanted you to achieve, a mandate, if you will—what was the mandate they gave you once you got the job? They must have sat you down and said, “Neala, we came to you. We need you.” Why do they need you? Why you, and what is it that they want you to do?
Ms. Neala Barton: I know they certainly want to ramp up communications as we get closer to the games. We’re going to have a lot more opportunities to tell people about what’s going on, to get them involved in the day to day around these games. I mean, just people from across the GTHA are really going to see this in their community. They’re going to start to have more and more opportunities to interact, whether it’s buying tickets, whether it’s applying to be a torch-bearer. So I think they certainly wanted to put a finer point on communications within the senior leadership team.
I believe I was approached just given the fact that I’ve worked in complex situations around communications, and the games have a lot of moving pieces, much like a government. There is a lot of change and you have to be able to move pretty quickly to adapt. And I think also just my experience with the Toronto area and GTHA media from my time here in Ontario.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Thank you for that. How much of your time—well, it’s tough to tell; you’ve been here for two weeks. That’s not very long. To be honest, I’m not quite sure why you got called to the committee at this point. It may be difficult for you to answer this question, but how much of your time have you or do you think you will spend liaising with the other communications departments? We just found out a couple of weeks ago that the secretariat had about 30 people, if you count the minister’s staff, working in communications. There seems to be a lot of staff working in communications for the Pan Am Games. What is your staff complement? How much time do you spend working coordinating between your staff and P/PAGS and the minister’s office?
Ms. Neala Barton: My staff complement is 14. They are not only focused on the day-to-day press releases, but also making sure that we have a number of publications that have to be produced for games time—manuals about various sports that need to go to associations, that kind of thing. So they are also responsible for that.
Beyond that, I can’t speak to what would exist within the secretariat. So far, I’ve only spent about an hour with Jennifer Lang, who is the director of communications over on the ministry side. I expect to regularly speak to her just to make sure that we are as coordinated as possible, but I can’t speak to anything beyond that. I apologize.
Mr. Rod Jackson: No, I understand. It’s tough, two weeks in, to have kind of an idea about what that relationship is. You don’t even probably know some of those people over there quite yet.
Having said that, if I was—you know, take this or not—to give you any advice, it would be to make sure that you do communicate with them, because in the past, that seems to have been a major falling down point for the whole organization: a lack of communications going on between the secretariat and TO2015. It has caused some problems, as far as communications have been concerned.
The velodrome—you mentioned that quickly. You said that it’s only one of two; I think the other one is in LA. I know there’s an outdoor one in Atlanta, I believe, but it’s not the same sort of premier training facility. My understanding is that the reason there is only one, so far, in North America, is because they consistently have become white elephants in the past. We’ve seen the Montreal velodrome become an arboretum in Montreal, very soon after it was used in the Olympics. They have a history of not being used that well after the games.
I understand there’s a legacy project to help continue some of these projects into the future, which is a good idea, to have that sort of foresight. However, it is quite a task. Really, what you’re talking about—Milton is a beautiful place, don’t get me wrong, but it’s not exactly an international destination yet. It could be, if the velodrome is marketed properly and the communications are done well on it, not just after the games but now, to set it up for success later, because now is the time to promote it. What kind of plan do you have, as VP of communications, to make sure that that legacy doesn’t just have money thrown at it, but it has resources in terms of a plan and plan execution to make sure that it has success into the future?
Ms. Neala Barton: I absolutely agree with you. It is something that we have to start now, and I know it’s already been started and we’re going to continue on with that process. I, obviously, a little bit after the games, won’t be there any more to continue that on, and I expect that municipalities—
Mr. Rod Jackson: Sorry, I’m going to interrupt you, just quickly on that quick note. How long will you be with the games after they’ve finished? I know that the day they’re over they won’t just finish, but can you—
Ms. Neala Barton: I believe my contract is till September 30, 2015.
In terms of Milton, we have a number of test events, for example, coming up. That’s where we get to test the tracks and test some of the systems that we’ll have to use during the games. I believe there is one in Milton, and that’s something that we’re going to make sure that we promote, and make sure that people get to sort of see how this is going to work, see what it’s all about, and that the cycling community gets some access to see what they’ll be able to use, potentially. That’s something that my team and I are going to continue to work out. I know we’re all very excited about it, and I know the cycling community is excited about it as well. But I agree with you that we do need to start now and we do need to be able to show people how these infrastructure projects are going to leave a legacy in their communities, and what kind of a difference they’re going to make.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes. Good. Thank you very much. I appreciate you taking the time to come in here. I know that you’re coming in with only a couple of weeks under your belt. Hopefully we’ll get a chance to talk more and get some updates from you in the future. Again, I appreciate you coming in and talking to us today.
Ms. Neala Barton: Thank you for having me.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Mr. Jackson. That concludes round one. Now we have the 10-minute round. Mr. Miller.
Mr. Paul Miller: I don’t think I’ll be taking 10 minutes. Basically, I’ve got one question. Obviously, you knew there was some controversy over Mr. Troop’s bonuses and his expenditures and whatever—the parking tickets and all the things like that. Now, are you under contract?
Ms. Neala Barton: Yes.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. When you signed your contract, were there any performance bonuses? Are you staying a year after the event, like he was? Is there a severance package? How does that work?
Ms. Neala Barton: I believe both of those would be included.
Mr. Paul Miller: So you do get a severance, if you stay the year after for the cleanup and everything.
Ms. Neala Barton: I believe it’s if I fulfill my contract. At the end of the day, that’s based on your performance. It’s also based on—sorry, my individual performance, and our ability to achieve our goals as an organization.
Mr. Paul Miller: So there are incentive bonuses, there’s a severance bonus and there’s a performance bonus. All three?
Ms. Neala Barton: I don’t believe there’s a severance bonus.
Mr. Paul Miller: So there’s two at least.
Ms. Neala Barton: There is a completion payment—
Mr. Paul Miller: A completion payment.
Ms. Neala Barton: —that has been—is known about publicly. It has been reported in many newspapers that this exists at the senior vice-president level. Because of when I’m joining the organization, I would not qualify for the same level that you would have read about in the paper. It is much lower than what you’ve read about in the paper because of the timing of when I’m coming on board to this organization. I can’t speak to any performance, just in the sense that I haven’t obviously—I’ve been here for two weeks—
Mr. Paul Miller: You haven’t performed enough to get a bonus.
Ms. Neala Barton: I have not performed enough to qualify for anything, nor is anything on the table. So I—
Mr. Paul Miller: But it is part of your contract?
Ms. Neala Barton: It would be part of my contract.
Mr. Paul Miller: Now, do you negotiate your contract or does someone do it for you? An agent? Or do you do it yourself?
Ms. Neala Barton: I would have done it myself.
Mr. Paul Miller: You do that yourself. Have you ever negotiated contracts like this before with the government or is this the first time?
Ms. Neala Barton: This was—well, it wasn’t with the government. It was with TO2015.
Mr. Paul Miller: Yes.
Ms. Neala Barton: I’ve negotiated other contracts with government and this was just another contract.
Mr. Paul Miller: That’s all I want to know. Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Mr. Miller. Ms. Damerla.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: No questions.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No questions. Mr. Jackson from the opposition?
Mr. Rod Jackson: No. Thank you very much for coming.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Wow. Congratulations. Thanks to all the members of the committee, and thank you for your remarks. We wish you good luck in your new role—
Ms. Neala Barton: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): —and all success in the games.
What we’ll do right now as a committee—our next scheduled witness is at 3:50 p.m. They of course have not arrived at this particular point. So with the committee’s permission, could we maybe take a break until further notice? Maybe 3:30 or something and we could come back? Let’s plan on 3:30, 3:50, somewhere in there. I think that that would be reasonable.
Okay. So this meeting is recessed until 3:30.
The committee recessed from 1447 to 1553.
CANADIAN OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
COMITÉ OLYMPIQUE CANADIEN
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I’ll call the meeting back to order after a brief recess. We’ll continue with our deliberations concerning the 2015 Pan/Parapan American Games and the Pan/Parapan American Games Secretariat.
We have with us the Canadian Olympic Committee and members thereof: the president, M. Marcel Aubut. Bienvenue. We have Caroline Assalian, the chief sports officer, and also board member Mr. Walter Sieber. We welcome you to the committee. We look forward to your comments. You have a five-minute opportunity for opening remarks, followed by a 25-minute round of questioning by each of the three parties, followed by another 10, if the members here wish to use the entire time.
Thank you very much for coming. The floor is yours, and we look forward to your presentation.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, all of you, for the opportunity. I am delighted to address you in my capacity as the president of the Canadian Olympic Committee.
Je suis très heureux d’être ici pour vous parler au nom du Comité olympique canadien. Bien entendu, comme vous le savez probablement tous, mon expérience était surtout une expérience du sport professionnel.
My main experience comes from professional sport. I have been involved in high-performance sport as a board and executive member of the Canadian Olympic Committee since 2005 and as the president since 2009. I am a volunteer—je suis bénévole—president of the Canadian Olympic Committee, president of the Olympic foundation, board member of Toronto 2015 and other sport organization boards.
My team and I have worked since 2009 to transform the sport system in the country, to make it more efficient in order to win medals and improve our society through sport. Therefore, we place athletes and coaches at the centre of everything we do. They are the reason why we exist. We could do this if sport is a priority in this country and if we host, at home, the best sport events in the world. At the same time, we will achieve a legacy that guarantees a brighter future.
The government of Ontario is a critical partner in delivering these games. We want to tell you how much we appreciate what you have done so far, but you won’t be surprised to hear that we are looking for more.
These games are not only an Olympic product; they are a product of Ontario, a product of Toronto, and a product of Canada. According to the latest Sportcal poll released three weeks ago and confirmed at SportAccord in Turkey, Canada is now ranked second in the world in hosting major sport events—we were fourth last year. It’s great, but we have to live up to our good reputation and deliver every time.
Canada has hosted Pan American Games, Commonwealth Games, Universiades and three Olympic games, with Vancouver 2010 being the most recent. The Vancouver games were realized to their fullest potential. They were a source of pride for the city, the province and changed totally our country, and that momentum was a huge part of the success we just got in Sochi, away from home.
After Vancouver 2010, heroes emerged from the youth of this country. After the 2015 games in Toronto, youth of all races, religions and socio-economic backgrounds will be changed forever because they will have been transformed and exposed to what the human spirit could achieve through the pursuit of excellence.
Youth who are exposed to heroes learn to aspire to excellence themselves. The impact on our youth, and society at large, is the most important legacy of any major sport event. Sport matters, and these games matter.
Today, we have a unique opportunity at the right moment in Toronto, Ontario. This region has not hosted a multi-sport games of this magnitude since 1930—85 years ago. Incredible, and unacceptable. In addition, this region has tried twice—unsuccessfully—to host an Olympic games.
The Pan Am and Parapan Am Games are the largest sporting events ever held in our country, including Vancouver—bigger than the Vancouver games. These games are an opportunity to leave a legacy on the city, the province and the country—a legacy both of bricks and mortar, and a legacy for its citizens. The potential of these games is unlimited. Sport is a positive force on our society. With all due respect, ladies and gentlemen, this is above politics—it’s bigger than this.
At the Canadian Olympic Committee, we understand this opportunity, and therefore have instructed—we gave them instruction at all national sport federations to fully cooperate in sending the best athletes and, for the first time, achieving a top-two country rank at the Pan Am Games.
These games have an opportunity to be a game-changer for this region. It could pave the road to other major sporting events in this city and province. We only have one opportunity to get it right; this is not a recurring event. One chance, and it’s now.
The Toronto 2015 Organizing Committee is a very strong organization with lots of multi-sport organizational experience. He was at VANOC; I was at VANOC. We know the big business as far as delivering multi-sport events. Those guys are good—very good. They absolutely deserve our full support, unwavering encouragement and unquestionable confidence to deliver these games at the highest level never done before, at the highest level possible.
The 2015 Pan Am/Parapan Am Games are our games—yours and ours. We must deliver them together. They cannot be done successfully any other way.
Thank you for your time. I hope I’m okay in my limit, and we are here for your questions.
Le Président (M. Grant Crack): Pas de problème.
M. Marcel Aubut: Merci beaucoup.
Le Président (M. Grant Crack): De rien. Merci à vous aussi. C’est au gouvernement, oui?
Thank you very much for your presentation. We’ll pass it over to the government right now: Ms. Damerla.
Mme Dipika Damerla: Merci beaucoup. Bonjour.
M. Marcel Aubut: Bonjour, madame.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: I was very impressed by the passion in your speech. Thank you so much. I was struck by two things that you said. One was that it’s time for Ontario to host, given our role in Confederation. We are one of the largest provinces. It’s time for us to be hosting a large, international games of the scale of the Pan/Parapan Games.
The second thing that struck me is that these games ought not to be about politics, and we couldn’t agree with you more because this really is about the people of Ontario. This really is about our collective pride, regardless of which party we belong to. We all want this to be successful. Thank you so much for echoing the sentiments that this committee has been working towards.
I just have a few questions for you. Let me just begin with the legacy piece that you spoke about. One of the things that I understand is that because of what we are building here in Scarborough, the aquatics complex, the Canadian sports—CSO, is that the Canadian sports organization?
Ms. Caroline Assalian: CSIO.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: —is going to be moving now its head office to Ontario. I was just curious: How important is that and what does that mean for Ontario?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Thank you very much, first of all, for your compliments. We appreciate it. We are talking about the biggest city of our country, you know? That’s the financial capital of our country. This city deserves that kind of event, and I can’t believe 85 years without it.
As far as your precise questions, I will pass it to my colleagues on the right. You know who Walter Sieber is: He’s a member of the sport program commission of the International Olympic Committee—a Canadian who is on that committee is really a very big thing. He is in charge, also, of legacy at the 2015 board. Walter, the floor is yours.
Mr. Walter Sieber: Thank you very much. It’s a very good question. Sports institutes in this country play a crucial role in preparing athletes for world championships and Olympic Games. As you know, we have a program in this country, Own the Podium, and they distribute money also to the sport institute.
I have to say that when the sports institute is integrated in a university, it’s always a very good sign because, as you know, in a university you have research, you have a phys ed department etc. I think it was time for Ontario to get a real institute of sports. This was, by the way, one of the major reasons why the COC, years back before the bid was first going forward—this was one of the visions of the COC: that in Toronto you would have an institute of sport.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Thank you. Mr. Aubut, you’ve had a lot of experience, obviously, on the Canadian Olympic Committee, and you have some experience with other jurisdictions who have hosted these games, and now you are here as part of the board of the executive committee. So I just wanted to ask you: Given all of your past experience and now that you’ve spent some time on the TO2015 board as a director, tell me what makes these games special, in your view, compared to other Canadian jurisdictions that may have held similar games. What are we doing different or better?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I would say that being the biggest show, the biggest organization, hosting so many athletes, hosting so many people from outside, and the logistics of this and also to do it in a city when they didn’t have it lately here—it’s an absolute encouragement and the commitment to do it even better than any time before. I think these games are going to be very close to the quality of the level of the Olympic Games. There’s nothing less than Toronto could do is to have the best games ever in the history of the Pan Am Games, and they are on the verge to do it. The direction is right. The management in place—I have confidence. It’s an Olympics product—I’m Olympics in Canada. I’m telling you that I am totally confident now that we are going to succeed and deliver the games at that level.
What makes it special? It’s not a winter games. It’s summer, and it’s bigger, and it’s the first time that we’ll do something of that magnitude in the biggest city in our country. That’s what probably encourages and motivates us the most.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Here in government, we feel that in this set of games we are doing three things very differently from anybody before us. One is the fact that we have deliberately decided that our facilities won’t be in one place like most games. Instead, we have decided to spread the facilities around southern Ontario because we want Ontarians from different parts of the province to benefit from the legacy of the games.
The second thing we believe we are doing differently is that we are planning the legacy piece from the get-go. The legacy isn’t an afterthought—“Let’s get the games, let’s get it built, and then we’ll worry about what to do with the facilities.” We, as a government, have, from the get-go, really been focused on not just building and getting to the games, but what we will do with a facility once the games have gone to make sure that it doesn’t become a white elephant.
The third thing that I believe this government has done very differently: These are the most open and transparent games ever. As a government, we voluntarily brought the games under FIPPA, freedom of information. No other jurisdiction has ever done that. Expenses are online. As a board of directors, you probably already know that your expenses are online.
I just wanted your thoughts on these three things that we are doing differently.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I think the explanation you are giving us as far as spreading makes a lot of sense. The facilities, after that, are going to be right on-site for those who really need them, instead of being centralized.
As far as the governance and the open information, I never saw that before.
Mr. Walter Sieber: I might just add one little remark about the regionalization of the sports. This, in fact, is a unique opportunity to have many sports in the greater Toronto area. This would not be possible for the Olympic Games. When you talk about legacy, it is true; you have legacies all around, and I personally feel extremely comfortable that there will be a real legacy in all of these municipalities after the games in 2015.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I will add, very modestly, that we are the ones who chose Toronto. It’s the Canadian Olympic Committee that made the choice, with the support of the locals, of course. But as far as choosing and going to Toronto, that was my organization’s choice.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: That’s interesting. Do you mean in terms of when the bid was made?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Yes. It was we who said, “In the whole country, nobody should go against Toronto. We are behind Toronto to bid for the games.” That was our choice, and I was on the board at that time.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: That’s an interesting insight that I did not know.
How do you think we are doing in terms of the rollout, the planning?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: The last boards were very encouraging. The attendance at the board is huge. The engagement is huge. They are starting to feel the pressure about the time left; it’s like tomorrow. I am feeling very well, sleeping at night, about the success of these games now.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Just coming a little bit to the nuts and bolts of the 2015 board itself, could you perhaps walk us through who exactly appoints the members of the board?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: There are some who come from government—this government, the federal government—from the COC, and from different sport partners who have an interest in the success of this. It’s just a normal way. The process is very well followed, and the quality of the board is at a very, very high level, too.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Essentially, what you’re telling me is that all levels of government are involved.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: All levels have got a big stake in it.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: What is the exact relationship between Toronto 2015 and the three levels of government and the COC and CPC? How does it all fit in?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: As I was saying, it’s above politics. I think we could see, as far as the relations of those five or six different partners, that they put everything on the side as far as “partisannerie” and just work together. We have no choice. The reputation of our country, our province and our city—let’s do it together right away. There is no more of that waste of time of arguing for little things.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Are you part of any negotiations to try and secure sponsorships or additional partners for TO2015?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: We all help. Board members are there as an asset, to help management to open doors and achieve the deal we need to get the revenue in.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Tell me a little bit about the athletes. They are the centrepiece of the games. The venues are nice, but at the end of the day it’s about these athletes who are going to go out there and—I always like to say that every single athlete at that starting line carries not just his or her own aspirations but the aspirations of millions of people of whichever country they’re representing. So it’s an amazingly emotional, very powerful, thing.
A few times, I’ve attended the women’s Paralympic basketball team—oh, sorry. I always get the name—is it Parapan Games basketball team, wheelchair basketball? They’re so pumped to represent Canada here on home turf. So tell me a little of your interaction with athletes and what they are feeling.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Thank you for the question, because the athletes are everything. It’s the core business. That’s what we changed so much in 2009—coaches and athletes. That’s why we exist. We are fortunate enough to have the chief of sport—that woman on my left—of the whole country. When we have great medals, that’s because of her, and when we don’t have any, that’s still her. I would like her to really answer this. She is pushing us so hard, who are coming from everywhere, professional sports, businesses and everything, about remembering that the core business is the athletes and coaches.
Go ahead, ma’am.
Ms. Caroline Assalian: Thank you. We’ve all seen it—and our president has mentioned this in his opening remarks: the power of athletes on everyone. We talk about the youth, but it is on me as an adult just as much as it is on kids. I think bringing the games to this area stimulates the private sector, but it also brings youth closer to sport and makes them understand sport beyond hockey and basketball; right? So there are kids who dream about being an archer or dream about modern pentathlon. These are things that kids—if they don’t like basketball and they don’t like hockey, where do they turn to? These games expose youth to 36 different sports. At the end of the day, we all feel pride when we see a Canadian athlete perform, regardless of male, female, where they’re from, all of that. It cuts across all of that, and it unites us all. That is the power of sport and it’s what the athletes do. Seven hundred and fifty athletes will be here—
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Wow.
Ms. Caroline Assalian: The largest ever in a Canadian team, ever.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: So if one piece is the athletes, the other piece we believe is the people of Ontario. We want 20,000 volunteers to be part of these games, and I’m told that’s the largest marshalling of volunteers in peacetime in the history of Canada. So tell me: Are you involved in that, and how is that going—the volunteer engagement piece?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: From what I heard at the board—because we are not day-to-day operators, as you know. That’s going to be the biggest contingent ever as far as volunteers. I think the system about educating them to make sure they know what they have to do—because I just arrived from Sochi, and what touched our hearts the most, besides the medals, of course, is the smiles of the young Russian volunteers who were really trying to please us, trying to show the route, trying to give us the information. That’s probably the best souvenir I have from the Sochi Games. We need that same impression in Toronto after they leave the city.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: We’ll be on show. It will be our chance to show what a great country we are. Thank you so much. Merci beaucoup.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: It’s not a show for Toronto and Ontario; it’s a show for the two Americas. It’s the whole world who are going to have their eyes on this city for two or three weeks.
Ms. Dipika Damerla: Thank you so much.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Ms. Damerla. We’ll move to the official opposition: Mr. Jackson.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Sure. Thank you very much for coming today. I really appreciate you taking the time and effort to come and speak with us about the Pan Am Games today. I think all of us can agree that the Pan Am Games represents a tremendous opportunity for us to showcase Toronto and Ontario and all the surrounding hosting municipalities that are taking part in the games, and, not least, also showcase our athletes and leave them with an infrastructure. I think we all agree on that.
I just have a few questions for you. They’re fairly simple and basic. Can you fill me in on how often the organizing committee of TO2015 meets?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: As far as the board, you are talking about?
Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Regularly. We have a regular schedule so that we know the dates ahead of time for the whole year. I would say it’s every three months, but there are conference calls. There are additional meetings when we need them. You cannot say how many, but many enough to do our job properly.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Okay.
Ms. Caroline Assalian: Sorry, if I can just add, that’s at the board level. On the management level, the staff at the Canadian Olympic Committee go to every Pan American Games and every Olympic Games, and we are working with the management team at Toronto 2015 constantly.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: More than that, at the request of Pan Am Games chair Peterson and Saäd Rafi, the CEO, we just built a two-organization caucus that can meet at any time of the day and every time of the week right now as far as exchanging for solutions, exchanging for—because the Canadian Olympic Committee is the best expertise in sport in the country. We have lots of expertise. We did three Olympic Games, Montreal, Calgary and Vancouver, and we could help a lot. This connection, actually, is absolutely close to perfection right now.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Good. It’s good to hear.
How long have you been a member of the board? Since the beginning?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Me?
Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Yes, since the beginning.
Mr. Rod Jackson: And you’re also a member of its finance committee. Is that correct?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Yes.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Have you been a member of the finance committee from the beginning as well?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I think so, yes. I think it’s the same time.
Mr. Rod Jackson: And what are the responsibilities of the finance committee?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I would say it’s a bit of an executive committee. I always questioned the name of that committee. But it looks for me something like—there are three levels: management, finance committee and then the board. I always felt that was some kind of efficient power delegated from the boards, at the finance committee. I see it a bit like some kind of an executive with a smaller group about decisions that they are empowered to take, compared to the board decisions.
Mr. Rod Jackson: What kinds of decisions would the finance committee make?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: It’s really related to the finance, following the revenue as far as corporate revenue, as far as expenditures. They are really, really going deep on this to make sure that when they report to the board, it’s the right information. Also, they evaluate the risk.
Mr. Rod Jackson: How often do you receive detailed reports as a member of the finance committee?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Before any meetings. We have a lot of information. The target for a guy like me is to make sure that I really do the best I can as far as reading everything, asking questions ahead of time and being efficient when I show up there. Especially with the way the governance and the boards work these days, people take the work very seriously, and they are prepared when they arrive.
Mr. Rod Jackson: How often does the finance committee meet?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I would say there’s a regular—it’s about the same as the board. It’s in addition to the board meetings. A guy like me, who has to go to the board, finance, some committee meetings and also—
Mr. Rod Jackson: Oh, I know all about committee meetings in addition to your responsibilities.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I’m telling you, it’s lots of work. But knowing the importance of the situation and this project for this city, this province and this country, that’s the cost we have to pay, and we just pay it.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes. Your work as a member of the organizing committee and finance committee is voluntary. Is that correct?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Is what?
Mr. Rod Jackson: Is it voluntary?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I’ll give you the list. Everything I do is voluntary so far, except for a bit of law firm.
Mr. Rod Jackson: A bit of a work on the side, right? Good. Well, we need more people who volunteer—
Mr. Marcel Aubut: We don’t know what is a sideline anymore.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes, I understand.
Earlier, you said how much confidence you have in the leadership and the direction in which TO2015 has gone, but recently there has been a very significant shift in leadership at TO2015 that really doesn’t indicate a lot of confidence in the way things have been done in the past. Can you explain why that transition happened and why there were three high-level executives who were released from Pan Am, how that transpired and why it’s better today?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: The way I see it—as I said before, I’m not somebody who is operating every day—it’s a management decision, or recommendation, I should say, because a change of CEO is absolutely a board decision, and we did take that decision with the proper information.
It’s not that everything that had been done before was wrong, not at all, but the new chairman—when you have a new leader, usually they just put people around, like any minister or any of these things, who they feel more comfortable with, even if there is a lot of credit being given to the previous chair and previous CEO.
But according with his view, that was good but not good enough; he recommended to this board to make a change, and we supported him. The decision was a board decision.
Mr. Rod Jackson: The chair made the—
Mr. Marcel Aubut: The recommendation.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Okay, the recommendation.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Not decision; recommendation.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Right, understood.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: That’s his job.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes, absolutely, it is. What was the recommendation based on?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I just said it. I won’t say anything else, because that’s the truth. It was good. It was fine. It was good work, a good effort—maybe not good enough, and the chair just recommended that it was maybe time to make others leaders.
Mr. Rod Jackson: What sort of experience and confidence brought Mr. Rafi to the table? What is it that he brought that Mr. Troop didn’t bring to the table?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Maybe you should ask that question to the chair. But I’ve known him personally since a while, and he has got so much responsibility. As well as handling billions of dollars of money, he did health things in this province very successfully, and as a civil servant he was a winner everywhere.
He just brought somebody who could win here, too.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Okay. You mentioned earlier, in one of your answers to my questions, that you’re also, in either the finance committee or your role in the organizing committee, responsible for looking at risks and potential risks, which is perfectly normal for a board, and a duty. What kind of risks do you foresee in the future for the games—within the next year, before the success of the games?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Haste to do everything right, on time and on budget. This is a challenge, because every second that we talk about this counts as far as delivering this. That’s probably the main risk evaluation, is to deliver what we promised and more to the world.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Do you have any concerns with the security and transportation plans that P/PAGS has laid out? I know that at the end of the day, the organization of the games and the execution of the games lies with TO2015, but certainly some of the decisions that the secretariat is making are going to have an effect on some of the things that you are doing.
Two of the biggest ones would be security and transportation, both of which have come under some level of scrutiny lately. They must be of some sort of concern to you. I would suggest that even transportation is a fairly major one, with some major infrastructure works being planned and with a significant budget. Any comments on that?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: My comment on that is that if we are not concerned, we are not responsible. Every organizing committee about transportation and security right now in the world, doing events of that magnitude, is concerned all the time about delivering them.
We were very much concerned about transportation in the city of London. Just imagine the city of London, the most backed-up city as far as traffic in the world; they delivered the goods perfectly. I think Toronto could do the same, and maybe even better.
As far as security, it’s not in our budget. As you know, we are not working with the budget for security, but security is called by what’s happening all over the world. I just hosted the Prime Minister of Canada a few days ago in Quebec City. I was stunned to see what he needs right now as far as security, and that’s not him asking for this. It’s the RCMP who judge, depending on the risk, what he needs to be totally safe, and it’s called by orders. That’s the problem. It’s called by a third party, and it’s also called by different positions we could take as a country.
But we have to deal with it like it is. It is what it is, but unfortunately, what it is is costly. It’s a problem in everything happening all over the world right now, at every level.
Mr. Rod Jackson: No, I certainly agree, and that’s why there’s such a heavy level of scrutiny on it. It’s because of the flexibility in the budget that seems to be happening with it. I think that’s where the concern is for people we are elected to represent. That’s where politics get involved. We represent how this money is getting spent, in many ways. If there’s a failure in the transportation or the security structure of these games, it will lie at the feet of government. It will lie at the feet of all of us who have been elected to represent the people whose pockets this money is coming out of.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: That’s only how the money is spent. We need the results. These games have to be safe.
Mr. Rod Jackson: I couldn’t agree with you more.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: And these games have to be delivered with no major problems in transportation, because what the people remember—the athletes: the village. They talk about the village. For everybody else, it’s food, transportation and feeling safe. That’s what is left at the end, besides the results and the organization of the competition. That’s what’s left, and it has to be positive on all counts.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Do you think that the public has a right to know how much it’s going to cost them for security and for transportation, at the end of the day?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I assume, yes. I don’t think there is any secret for the public according to what you were just saying before. Nobody is hiding anything here and nobody is withholding things—nobody. I haven’t felt that for three or four years now, at any point, that people wanted to hide anything as far as informing the population. I’m giving you my personal feelings. I am on-site. I see how they do it, and I haven’t had that reaction at any moment.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes. There are certainly a lot of people in the public who would disagree with you and are a little concerned about some of the surprise expenditures. I don’t know that it’s even a matter of being hidden as much as a lack of communication that has happened, even between TO2015, the secretariat and the public in general.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: It’s possible, yes.
Mr. Rod Jackson: We had the VP of communications in earlier, and I mentioned to her that that’s a concern that I have, that she can probably make sure that she communicates with P/PAGS, with the secretariat, on a regular basis to make sure that those communications do happen and that the people whose pockets this money is coming out of have a good idea of what the games will actually cost in total. I understand that you have your own budget, but the government has opened up a lot of books in the ministries to be able to pay for things like security and transportation, and people need to understand exactly what that’s going to end up costing them. Really, the sales point should be what they’re getting for that value. That’s what we should be talking about, because I think there is great value to be had. That’s the discussion we need to be having: how much it’s going to cost and why it’s costing that, which I think has been lacking up to this point. That’s just my little commentary on it.
That’s all for me, Chair, unless my colleagues have anything they’d like to add.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Rod Jackson: Thank you very much for coming in today.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you, Mr. Jackson. We’ll move to the third party, the NDP: Mr. Miller.
Mr. Paul Miller: Good afternoon, Mr. Aubut.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Good afternoon, Paul.
Mr. Paul Miller: I have read your bio and appreciate your extended experience, especially with hockey, one of my favourite games. Also, your commitment to public service is very impressive. I, personally, have a real interest in this because some of my family members were involved in the first Pan Am Games in Hamilton. My aunt went on to train for the Berlin Olympics as a swimmer. I have an extended family in high-level sports, so this is an important event for me as well.
But I certainly can’t agree with your point that it’s above politics, as my colleague stated, because I’m old enough to have seen and been there for the Montreal Olympics, and I know the horror story of the finances after that with the Big O and all the things that went on. Some of the venues have now got weeds covering them. Habitat and all of the things that went on at Expo 67 and some of the costs there, and the world’s fair in Vancouver—I’ve seen some financial disasters involved around and in sports at the taxpayers’ expense. It is our job to be duly diligent and to follow the expenditures. As much as we’re excited about it and as much as it’s good for Canada, good for Ontario and exciting, we also have a responsibility to the taxpayers, especially in struggling economies, as you could appreciate. I’m going to ask you some questions.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I could answer on this comment that you just made.
Mr. Paul Miller: Sure.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: My expression is: Politicians shouldn’t be the ones who hurt this project. The critics, every day and at every moment of the day, every week, every month, could kill this project. That’s what I mean, with all due respect, about your job protecting the taxpayers’ money, that I respect and agree. At the same time, I’m telling you that if the people don’t feel that at one point we are pulling together to deliver the best success of these historic Pan Am Games, we are going to miss it. If we miss it, maybe you’ll win your point on politics, but you lose lots more as a community. That’s my only point.
Mr. Paul Miller: I hear you, and I agree that certainly we want it to be a success and within budget. That would even be a bigger win for us if that succeeds. Of course, the legacy costs are important, and the use of the facilities after the games are certainly beneficial to the host communities. So we certainly wish that to happen.
But as my colleague said, it’s my job as the critic to make sure that it does come under budget and make sure that there aren’t bad expenditures. You’ve seen some of the fiascos that have happened with some of the expenditures that have been questionable at best. Whether it’s a Tim Hortons coffee or a car wash—you’ve seen some of the horror stories. As you stated, the public does have a right to know that. Your colleague also nodded his head that they have a right to know when these things are going on. If people are abusing the system, no matter what level they’re at, whether they’re the committee or the TO2015 or the ministry or whoever—certainly have to be accountable to the public. Anyway, I’ve worn that out.
I see that you were a member of the board of the Vancouver organizing committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games and a member of VANOC’s audit committee and governance and ethics committee. At the end of those games in Vancouver, is it your opinion that—what was the status? Was there a large deficit or any deficit?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: We break even.
Mr. Paul Miller: You broke even?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Broke even, in—
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. That’s good.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: —in an incredibly bad economy—
Mr. Paul Miller: Right. That was good.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: —that nobody expected. And we were going to have a good legacy financially. We expect to have, but to break even in that situation was a miracle.
Mr. Paul Miller: That was good, yes.
I understand that you were a board member of the 2015 Toronto Pan American Games bid committee and are now a board member of the TO2015 organizing committee and a member of the finance committee, as has been stated.
As a member of the TO2015 finance committee, what is your opinion of the current state of the finances of these games?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Generally, I feel that, first of all, it’s managed well. People who are in charge of telling us what those numbers represent them well—but we still have a big challenge as far as working harder and getting more revenues and being creative. That’s why, with the leadership there right now, I understand that part. We have more than a year and a half to really make it optimal as far as generating the most revenue, but in general I’m satisfied. I’m also a businessman. I know what money is. I know the way it should be managed to be proper. I feel comfortable to be around.
Mr. Paul Miller: What, if any, relationship does the Fondation Nordiques have with the Pan/Parapan Games and competitions leading to the level of sport, and from where does it obtain its money to distribute to the athletes?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: No relation at all.
Mr. Paul Miller: None at all?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: No. It’s the same man at the top, but there’s zero relation.
Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. I just wanted to straighten that out.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Zero relation—you thought you had a good fish there; that’s not a good one.
Mr. Paul Miller: I thought I had a nice one.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Yeah. You missed it.
Mr. Paul Miller: I missed that one.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Yes. Because the Nordiques Foundation is the foundation we created after I sold the Nordiques in 1995 to help the athletes in the region as far as three conditions: that they study, that they be at school; second, they have the talent, according to coaches and the federation; and, third, the parents have no financial help to help them to bring—
Mr. Paul Miller: So you were with the Nordiques organization?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I was the owner, sir.
Mr. Paul Miller: My father had a tryout with the Montreal Maroons way back.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: But I had the financial exposure.
Mr. Paul Miller: Yes. Sam Pollock, Sr., I think, signed him.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Yes. And the foundation is completely something—it has a zero relation with all the other bodies.
Mr. Paul Miller: From my personal experience in sports, from refereeing and playing hockey, I know that surprises can happen during an Olympic bid or games. Some surprise costs can crop up, for whatever reason—security. There could be issues. One of my problems was that the Pan/Parapan committee and the ministry—anyway, they chose—and the OPP were involved. I found it unusual that they chose a firm to do the security for the games from outside of Canada when there was a perfectly good Canadian firm here that was right down to the last two bidders. They chose this company, whom they had fined in the Vancouver games for not operating properly, and they also got fined in Ontario for not having a licence to operate in Ontario. So I was quite surprised when the OPP picked them as the firm. They’re from the States.
I was told by Mr. Troop, when I initially met him a few years ago, before this all started to roll, that he was going to use, as much as he could, Canadian content, Canadian firms, Canadian training, whatever he could do locally. It seems to have fallen off the rails a bit, because the expertise was here in Canada but is not being utilized, and I was not happy about that.
There have been a couple of other contracts awarded to overseas companies in Hamilton, in reference to the stadium being built, in reference to electrical technology. Technicians and companies have been brought in from France and Switzerland, and we had the expertise right in Hamilton, and good, unionized workers that were not used.
There was a directive sent down from your committee by somebody that was running it. I have a copy of the email. He sent out emails saying, “Don’t hire unionized workers to do this,” which was pretty concerning, to say the least. I’m sure you haven’t heard about it or don’t know about it, but I’m happy to share that with you. I was surprised. I had a couple of local firms—Burlington, Hamilton and St. Catharines—come in to visit me, and union leaders, who weren’t happy about the bids and how they were handled and who was getting the final nod.
What I’m getting to is—and I’m sure you don’t have answers on those particular things, but do you think the bids and the tenders that were put out for the games were fairly run? Do you feel that there was no interference on who got the contracts to do the building or do the security?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: For what I have been a witness, and as you just said, what you mentioned never came in our place. But what I said, as far as the one we are handling, there were a lot of very minutieux ways to do those things. What was important was—
Mr. Paul Miller: Could you explain that word to me?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Minutieux—meticulous.
Mr. Paul Miller: Meticulous.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Yes. Very, very meticulous ways. What I saw as far as the board of 2015—
Mr. Paul Miller: I’m not sure I share that comment, but that’s okay. We can move on.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: You gave your opinion; I gave mine.
Mr. Paul Miller: Yes.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: That’s mine, and you won’t change mine.
Mr. Paul Miller: I was a defenceman, by the way.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: But I was there.
Mr. Paul Miller: Do you also help athletes choose which competitions they should participate in that will lead to higher-level competition and ultimately the Olympics? Do you have any role in channelling them?
Ms. Caroline Assalian: It is mostly the coach and the national sport federation that make the decision as to which competition is best for their preparations.
Mr. Paul Miller: So the unsung heroes are the coaches. There you go.
Ms. Caroline Assalian: Absolutely.
Mr. Paul Miller: With respect to your appearance before this committee today, did you have any communications with members of the governing body, the ministry or anything, to prep you? Did you just come on your own without any—did they say, “They might ask you this, or they might come at you in this direction”? Did you have any of that?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: No. I asked a few people at 2015 how they find the experience here. They said it was a nice experience.
First of all, we do exactly the same thing in front of the federal government regularly. We are familiar with this process.
Mr. Paul Miller: When you were with VANOC, did you have any involvement with the private security for those games, including approval of contracts?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: No.
Mr. Paul Miller: Nothing like that. That was left up to who?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I think it was on a separate base, but I was not there at that time.
Mr. Walter Sieber: RCMP.
Mr. Paul Miller: RCMP. What members of the board of the Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games had relationships, personal or professional, with that company that I had concerns with? Did any of them have any relationship with Contemporary Security?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: That doesn’t ring a bell to me.
Mr. Paul Miller: You’re not aware of that. Okay, that’s great. With such a hodgepodge of private security, OPP, municipal policing and RCMP, are you concerned—I brought up at the last meeting that I was concerned that they put a number on the costs for policing and security. I think $239 million was the cap. Then I find out at the last meeting we had here—not your group, but I want to get your input on this—that they hadn’t signed contracts with the local police departments yet, which would be Hamilton regional, Halton regional, Peel regional, Welland police. They hadn’t, so that would add to that. So that was kind of a misleading figure that they had given me, because there will be additional costs once they sign contracts with the municipal police departments. Did you guys have any input on that?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: No.
Mr. Paul Miller: Nothing. You see, these are the types of costs that politicians are worried about. They add up. It’s great to be gung-ho about the games, the athletes, the glory, Canada and Ontario. That’s fine. I agree that it’s wonderful to strive for the podium and the gold. I have no problem; I’ve spent my whole life pushing people to do that. But I also am very concerned that we don’t get into another instant replay, TSN moment of the Montreal Olympics and all the things that happened there, or over-expenditure.
Why we do these committees and why we’re keeping an eye on it is because not everyone shares the enthusiasm for sports that you and I do, and some of them are out there saying, “Why did we need this?” There are the soothsayers who say, “We didn’t need to blow all this money. We could have put it into poverty, schooling, health care.” How do you deal with people who have that negative feeling about the expenditures for the games?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: When we are able to introduce that project and what it could do for the country as far as the youth who are going to be influenced by heroes to stay at school instead of leaving too early, to not touch alcohol or drugs—maybe it’s a great solution to control the health costs in this province and in this country at every level.
Mr. Paul Miller: Role models.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Role models. They are going to see right away that the investment is worth it and the return on the investment is greater than any other investment.
Mr. Paul Miller: That’s good.
I’ll be happy when they get a team back in Quebec City and Hamilton, Ontario. We should have gotten a team. That guy, Phil Esposito, screwed us out of that. Anyway—
Mr. Walter Sieber: If you don’t mind, I would just add something.
Mr. Paul Miller: Go ahead.
Mr. Walter Sieber: I’ve been involved since 1976. One thing, of course, we have to understand when it comes to an organizing committee—Pan Am, Commonwealth or the Olympic Games—there are always two items which are outside of the organizing committee, and that’s security and transport. Of course, when we talk about it here in Toronto, especially on the board—as you know, we have a $1.4-billion budget. Half of it is for infrastructure and for the organization of the games. An organizing committee is not the body who could deal with the very complex security and transport questions. By the way, in all the games, that is always a big question mark: What will be the last figure in security and transport? Both of them are so important for any organizing committee.
Mr. Paul Miller: You are aware that in the London games there were all kinds of problems with security. Eventually, they had to call in the army because the private security firms were not working too well. They didn’t have the manpower or the expertise to control it, so they had to call in the army. I hope you don’t have to call in the army on this one. So I’m not quite thrilled about that American company running it.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I know, but London—you’re talking about the highest risk?
Mr. Paul Miller: Higher risk.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Higher risk.
Thank you very much, Mr. Miller, for your interest and your good comments.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): We’ll go to the next round of questioning. The government?
Ms. Dipika Damerla: No questions, thanks.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): We’ll move to the PCs, the official opposition.
Mr. Michael Harris: We wanted research to confirm that that group of elite athletes related to Paul Miller is actually on his wife’s side.
Mr. Paul Miller: It’s on my dad’s side.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That’s duly noted in Hansard.
Any questions, Mr. Jackson?
Mr. Rod Jackson: No, but thank you very much for coming in and talking to us today, all three of you.
Mr. Paul Miller: I have questions.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Mr. Miller, feel free.
Mr. Paul Miller: Insurance plays a big part in this, of course. What kind of coverage did your committee get for venues and athletes? What kind of insurance coverage have we got, and what is that going to cost us?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Management would be the best—
Mr. Paul Miller: To answer that.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Precisely. I just notice that you like precision.
Mr. Paul Miller: That’s right.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: You don’t like to be full with numbers. Don’t ask us this question.
Mr. Paul Miller: Would you guys be able to get that for me?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: We could get it. We could help you.
Mr. Paul Miller: I would appreciate that.
Sir, do you sit on any boards of any private security companies at all?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: No.
Mr. Paul Miller: No, you’re not on that. I guess—
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I don’t think at this time it would be a good idea.
Mr. Paul Miller: By what process have you been invited to sit on the various amateur athletic sporting events boards and committees like VANOC and the Pan/Parapan Am Games?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: I’m the president of the Canadian Olympic Committee.
Mr. Paul Miller: That might have something to do with it.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Probably.
Mr. Paul Miller: It might.
Okay, I’m finished. Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. Is the Chair allowed to ask a question? How’s it going with the Quebec Nordiques? Are we coming back?
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Yes, we are exposed to media here, I suppose, huh? I cannot answer this.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Very good.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: But the hope is very high, especially with a new coliseum coming up.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Excellent. Thank you for your work on that file.
Thank you very much for coming, all three of you. We really, really appreciate it.
Mr. Marcel Aubut: Thank you for the opportunity. Good luck. And please, please, please: This project is a project which is going to be great for this city, this country and this province. We can’t mess it up. Please, let’s work together. Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much.
Okay, everyone, this meeting is adjourned. Thank you very much.
The meeting is in room 151 on Wednesday, by the way. This meeting is now adjourned for the second time.
The committee adjourned at 1646.
Monday 28 April 2014
Committee business G-659
Pan/Parapan American Games review G-661
Toronto 2015 Organizing Committee G-661
Ms. Neala Barton
Canadian Olympic Committee / Comité olympique canadien G-666
Mr. Marcel Aubut
Mr. Walter Sieber
Ms. Caroline Assalian
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT
Chair / Président
Mr. Grant Crack (Glengarry–Prescott–Russell L)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Présidente
Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield (Etobicoke Centre / Etobicoke-Centre L)
Ms. Sarah Campbell (Kenora–Rainy River ND)
Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield (Etobicoke Centre / Etobicoke-Centre L)
Mr. Grant Crack (Glengarry–Prescott–Russell L)
Ms. Dipika Damerla (Mississauga East–Cooksville / Mississauga-Est–Cooksville L)
Mr. John Fraser (Ottawa South L)
Mr. Michael Harris (Kitchener–Conestoga PC)
Ms. Peggy Sattler (London West ND)
Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock PC)
Mr. Jeff Yurek (Elgin–Middlesex–London PC)
Substitutions / Membres remplaçants
Mr. Rod Jackson (Barrie PC)
Mr. Paul Miller (Hamilton East–Stoney Creek / Hamilton-Est–Stoney Creek ND)
Clerk / Greffière
Ms. Sylwia Przezdziecki
Staff / Personnel
Ms. Anne Marzalik, research officer,