What Doug Ford is keeping secret about the Ontario Place plan

How much are the people of Ontario going to get for giving up a public waterfront park to a foreign private company?

Thestar.com
Dec. 19, 2022
Edward Keenan
OPINION

There are no end to the questions you could ask about the provincial plan to put a privately operated spa and waterpark at Ontario Place. Like: Do we really want to put something like that on an existing waterfront park space? Or, after seeing the plans that make it clear the structure will dominate the waterfront views, is the building nice enough to be a permanent dominating fixture of the western skyline? Or, does the province really want to be on the hook to spend 100 million or so on a new parking lot for this private business? Or, even if your own answer to those other questions is “yes,” why clear-cut a forest of more than 850 trees to build a big glass box there on the west island, when you’ve got a huge swath of barren asphalt on the Ontario Place site just slightly to the east near Echo Beach waiting to be turned into something?

But there’s a more fundamental question than that which would need to be answered for even an elementary evaluation of the proposal, and one whose answer we can’t know, because the provincial government is keeping it a secret.

That question is: What do we get?

The spa company behind this project recently announced it has signed a long-term lease on the public land the business will operate on. You and me -- the people of Ontario -- own that land. So if we have a new tenant, as we seem to, what’s in it for us?

Sorry, we’re not allowed to know that.

I first asked the provincial government about this almost two weeks ago, asking specifically about the terms of the lease -- how much rent would be paid, and for how long. I got a quick response -- but one that failed to even acknowledge the direct questions: I was directed to a November statement by Infrastructure Minister Kinga Surma announcing the project’s city application. It was a statement in which the existence of a lease wasn’t even mentioned, never mind the terms disclosed.

So I responded asking the same questions again. And waited. And waited.

Finally, this week, I asked again: how much, and for how long? “Is there a reason the provincial government is keeping this information secret?” I asked.

And I got a written response that at least acknowledged the questions. “As is the case with many negotiated agreements, due to commercial sensitivities, the terms of the agreement remain confidential,” wrote Andrea Chiappetta, a spokesperson for the Minister of Infrastructure, “this is common practice.”

So, there you go. It’s a secret.

The people of Ontario have entered an agreement with a foreign company. The people of Ontario are not allowed to know the terms of that agreement. Commercial sensitivities, you understand.

Now, despite commercial sensitivities, I happen to know the length and price of the lease for the public land the homes on Toronto Island sit on, and the price and term of the lease of public land to Billy Bishop Airport, and I can plainly see many of the key terms of leases on some publicly owned buildings or land at Exhibition Place right there on the city’s website. (For instance, the phase two lease for Hotel X at the CNE had its details in a confidential attachment, but the public report still estimated receipt of $174 million of rent over a 39-year term.)

But even if this is indeed common practice, it still has the effect of making it impossible to evaluate whether the agreement is a good idea. We can see what this tenant plans to build on our land -- including, indeed, its provision of a new strip of infill public parkland and a beach surrounding its facility. We can see what our provincial government may need to spend before turning the site over to them, apparently a couple of hundred million dollars in landfill remediation and reportedly also much more for an underground parking garage.

So we know what we’re giving up. And we know the changes they make to the site will be permanent. But we don’t know what we get in exchange.

How are any of us, then, supposed to know if we think this is a good deal?

Like plenty of other people, I’m already on the record with my impression that all things being equal, I think this is a poor proposed use for what is already a decent public park just waiting for some sprucing up and programming. But maybe all else is not equal. Maybe there’s something about this deal that would make it seem far more attractive -- perhaps it will be so lucrative for the provincial government that it amounts to an offer we can’t refuse. On the other hand, perhaps it’s even worse than I imagined, and it is a straight-ahead giveaway in which we’re all being fleeced.

It’s our land. It is some of the most desirable, highest-value property in the entire city. We’re preparing to give it up for the long term. Is it a good deal for us, or a giveaway? It appears we’re not allowed to know.

So in addition to the other questions about this project, add one more: how is it considered remotely acceptable to keep information like this a secret? And how