Legislative Assembly of Ontario

The committee met at 1404 in committee room 2.

PAN/PARAPAN AMERICAN
GAMES REVIEW

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I’d like to call the meeting to order. I’d like to welcome all members of the committee, special guests, legislative research, the Clerk’s office and Hansard. This afternoon we’re going to be continuing our review of the 2015 Pan/Parapan American Games and the Pan/Parapan American Games Secretariat.

Consistent with the motion that was passed by the committee, we will have two delegations that will speak for five minutes, followed by 25 minutes of questioning.

PAN/PARAPAN AMERICAN
GAMES SECRETARIAT

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The first witness is at the request of the third party: NDP. It is my pleasure to welcome, from the Pan/Parapan American Games Secretariat, Susan Capling, director of games delivery and infrastructure division. We welcome you this afternoon. Ms. Capling, you have five minutes. Thank you.

Ms. Susan Capling: Thank you. Good afternoon. I appreciate the invitation to appear before the committee and the opportunity to provide a brief opening statement. I have provided a copy of these opening remarks to the committee Clerk.

As you know, I am the director of the games delivery branch at the Pan/Parapan American Games Secretariat, also referred to as P/PAGS. I have held this position since September 2012. I have been in the Ontario public service in various roles throughout the period since 1992. I will do my best to answer the committee’s questions and to clarify issues to the best of my knowledge, based on the time I have been in my role.

As you know, the Pan/Parapan American Games Secretariat is a part of the government of Ontario. P/PAGS’ responsibilities include oversight of the province’s $500-million investment in Toronto 2015, the games organizing committee; planning and delivery of key elements of the government’s celebration and legacy strategy; coordination with other levels of government, including the federal government and games host municipalities; and coordination with other provincial ministries with planning and delivery lead in specific areas.

The Pan/Parapan American Games Secretariat is divided into three divisions, each headed by an assistant deputy minister. Each division has a separate and distinct area of responsibility: first of all, the risk management and financial oversight division; second, the partner engagement and legacy division; and, third, the games delivery and infrastructure division.

The games delivery branch, of which I am director, is one of two branches within the games delivery and infrastructure division. I report to the assistant deputy minister of the games delivery and infrastructure division, Mr. Tim Casey. The branch focuses on coordination of provincial services to the games and helps to ensure provincial planning is integrated with Toronto 2015 planning. More specific examples of what the branch does on a day-to-day basis include supporting, coordinating or participating in various tables with provincial ministries which are providing services to the games. Meetings could include provincial operational ministries alone, provincial ministries and Toronto 2015, or provincial ministries, Toronto 2015 and municipal and federal government partners.

The branch is also providing support for municipal services negotiations for the games. This will be a key job for the branch over the next several months, as we sit down with TO2015 and all games host municipalities to talk about what municipal services are needed for the games and what funding the province will provide for these services. This will be done consistent with the principles of the multi-party agreement for the games.

Connected with this, the branch is also organizing a regular dialogue with the chief administrative officers and city managers of games host municipalities, as a means of keeping them informed of provincial activities. The branch also assisted with organizing a recent meeting of games municipality heads of council.

An element of work for the branch is also the delivery of the integrated exercise program for the games. The branch is collating this work with the Office of the Fire Marshal and emergency management at MCSCS, with assistance from the federal government. This will be a multi-stage exercise, with the objective of ensuring that all games partners’ operational plans are aligned and working well together.

As we get closer to 2015 and the delivery of the games, games planning is increasingly moving from strategic to more operational planning.

Once again, I thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee today. I would be happy to provide whatever additional information may be helpful to the committee as it relates to the games delivery branch at P/PAGS.

1410

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Ms. Capling. We will pass it over to Mr. Miller from the NDP.

Mr. Paul Miller: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon.

You covered some of my initial questions about your experience and where you come from. I will probably delve a little deeper into the role of the games delivery and infrastructure division, specifically with respect to your role in games delivery and exactly what day-to-day assignments you do in the delivery of the games. You’ve given us kind of a vague—

Ms. Susan Capling: Sure. The games delivery branch is one of two branches in the games delivery and infrastructure division. My role really focuses in three ways, I think, as I covered off in my opening remarks: first of all, coordination and alignment of planning across games operational ministries that are focused on providing services to the games that a host jurisdiction would normally provide. So it’s alignment and coordination of those services, and I do a number of things in that regard to assist with that planning.

I should also reiterate that the games organizing committee itself, Toronto 2015, is responsible for the delivery of the games and the staging—

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. Do you have any experience in security? Have you ever worked for a contemporary security company?

Ms. Susan Capling: No.

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. The organizational chart in the results-based plan briefing book, 2013-14, states that the ADM for regional and corporate services reports administratively “to Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration. Provides services to Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sports and Pan/Parapan American Games Secretariat.” It also states that there are many dual reporting relationships and mentions several other ministries.

However, on the secretariat’s website, under the “Open and Transparent Games” section, there is a whole section on security which states that the secretariat will “release revised projected costs for security, and budgets and plans for transportation,” but in the organization chart, even with these many dual reporting relationships, neither the Ministry of Transportation nor the Ministry of Community Safety are mentioned.

Can we assume that the secretariat is responsible for security and transportation in the games?

Ms. Susan Capling: No. The secretariat plays a coordinating role. It’s a bit like if you had a wheel, and there are spokes coming out of the wheel. It’s a hub in the middle.

Mr. Paul Miller: You’re the hub?

Ms. Susan Capling: That’s probably a bit overstated for my role in particular.

Mr. Paul Miller: Wouldn’t security be one of the spokes?

Ms. Susan Capling: That analogy should probably only be taken so far. I’m just trying to paint a bit of a picture for you.

Again, my role is coordination. I also spend, as my opening statement covered off, a fair deal of time on the integrated exercise program for the games and on municipal services agreements.

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. Municipal service agreements—sorry for cutting you off. It’s my understanding that TO2015 and the secretariat have not signed deals for security with local regional police—Halton, Hamilton, Welland—and they’ve come up with that number, $239 million, for security services and protection. You would have no exposure to additional costs, being the hub of that wheel you told me about and all the spokes—I think security plays a huge role in that. You mean to tell me that you would have no input or any reporting done to you about the—you just mentioned municipal deals, which you are going to oversee or be involved in. That would include dealing with the regional police of Halton, Hamilton and Welland for the costs for their manpower, their overtime and their time. So you’re telling me you’ve got nothing to do with that, even though you’re going to be dealing with all the contracts for the municipalities. I’m surprised at that statement.

Ms. Susan Capling: Is there—sorry, I think you had a number of questions in there.

Mr. Paul Miller: Have you got anything to do with the contracts that are pending, haven’t been signed yet, with the regional police departments of the other venue sites, other than Toronto? Have you got anything to do with that? Because it’s going to add additional costs to the $239 million that they quoted was covering everything, according to the government. Now, I’m finding out that they haven’t even signed any deals with the regional police and that could escalate the costs immensely, because of the manpower and whatever they require to enforce and work with the OPP and the private security company.

Ms. Susan Capling: I should step back and just say that MCSCS is the responsible and accountable lead for security and security planning, and for the negotiation of the agreements with local municipal police services.

Mr. Paul Miller: Does that include you?

Ms. Susan Capling: No. So the—

Mr. Paul Miller: So what’s your role as the hub?

Ms. Susan Capling: The municipal services agreements that I was referring to in my opening remarks are for other municipal services to the games.

Mr. Paul Miller: Would that not include police services?

Ms. Susan Capling: No. That’s a separate and distinct piece, and that is under the leadership of MCSCS.

Mr. Paul Miller: So, in your role, you do not converse or have meetings with TO2015, the deputy minister, and the contracts that are being signed for various services in kind for the games? You don’t play any role in that?

Ms. Susan Capling: I’m not involved in the negotiations.

Mr. Paul Miller: So what exactly is your job?

Ms. Susan Capling: I’ll talk to you a little bit about my role with regard to the municipal services agreements that I’ve referenced here. The municipal service agreements that I have referenced in my opening remarks really stem from the multi-party agreement for the games and the principals in the multi-party agreement for the games. And just to back it up one step, the multi-party agreement is one of the key games agreements that governs the games. It was signed by Toronto 2015, the province, the federal government, the city of Toronto, the Canadian Olympic Committee—

Mr. Paul Miller: What’s involved in those discussions?

Ms. Susan Capling: In the municipal service agreements discussions, or—sorry, I’m just trying to make sure I’m addressing—

Mr. Paul Miller: I don’t think you are. You’re telling me all the people who are involved, but you’re not telling me—as you reiterated before and explained that you’re kind of like the middle and there’s all these spokes. Do the spokes know what the hub is doing? And does the hub know what the spokes are doing?

Ms. Susan Capling: I’ll just back up and talk to you a little bit about the municipal service agreement process a little bit more, because I think that will—

Mr. Paul Miller: I’m not getting it, but okay.

Ms. Susan Capling: —hopefully help to understand how the hub and the spokes and the wheel are all rolling here. So, under the principals of the multi-party agreement, there was—

Mr. Paul Miller: Who’s the multi-party? That’s what I’d like to know.

Ms. Susan Capling: I’m sorry?

Mr. Paul Miller: The multi-party. Who are they?

Ms. Susan Capling: Okay, so it is the city of Toronto, Toronto 2015—the games organizing committee, the federal government, the province, the Canadian Olympic Committee and the Canadian Paralympic Committee.

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. And the municipalities.

Ms. Susan Capling: The city of Toronto is a signatory to the multi-party agreement.

The multi-party agreement, with respect to municipal services, basically makes a provision of municipal services that are needed to help make the games a success in each municipality. For example, it could be emergency medical services, fire and rescue, street cleaning or parks maintenance, parking operations enforcement, garbage, recycling, graffiti removal—

Mr. Paul Miller: But my problem with that is, you’ve mentioned all the things that fall under—as a former councillor, they all fall under municipal taxpayers, all the things you’ve mentioned. And so do the police. We pay for policing in Hamilton, through the tax base, but you’ve left that one out and you said it’s a separate entity. So that group of people you’ve mentioned I’m sure have something to do with security—federal government, provincial government—but it doesn’t appear on your list of things that fall under municipal jurisdiction, as well as municipal tax dollars. Because policing in Hamilton is paid for by the taxpayers. So I’m a little confused why they’re being left out.

Ms. Susan Capling: To clarify, what I’m talking about here is the list of services and the kinds of services that might be covered under the terms and conditions of the multi-party agreement for the games—

1420

Mr. Paul Miller: Might be or are?

Ms. Susan Capling: We will work—Toronto 2015, the province and municipalities—to determine what services are needed at any venue and in any given municipality. Toronto 2015 will understand, given the state of its planning, what kinds of services are needed at the venue. For example, are street cleaning and parks maintenance going to be needed? We will sit down with the municipality and talk with them about what’s going on at the venue and the plans for the sport at the venue, the number of people etc., the number of operating days, what extra services are needed. The multi-party agreement makes provision for those.

Mr. Paul Miller: It sounds to me like you’re dealing with everything but one of the major costs, which is security. You’re telling me it’s a separate entity. You have not once said that it’s part of your mandate or part of your multi-party agreement with the municipalities. Obviously, policing is a huge cost that would go hand in hand—it seems like you’re avoiding or going around, not talking about security, and saying that falls under a different auspice.

I’m really concerned that those large parties you mentioned—someone in there has to be dealing with security. One of those groups has to be dealing with the protection of the venues. It’s not just about cleaning up and collecting garbage and lighting and all the things that municipalities provide. It’s their own local police departments that are going to be involved in policing, which falls under municipal dollars, which my residents pay for. You’re not talking about that at all, and I’m surprised. Can you tell me why you’re not talking about that?

Ms. Susan Capling: Yes, because the area of work I’m talking about is a very specific area of work, and negotiations with the municipalities that there’s a provision for, under the multi-party agreement—that is all about other kinds of services, rather than policing services—

Mr. Paul Miller: Rather than.

Ms. Susan Capling: —right—that could be eligible for compensation under the multi-party agreement. So it’s a separate piece of work and services that were contemplated.

Mr. Paul Miller: Compensation, you said—so rebates or something from the government to cover some of those multi-party agreements you’ve cut with municipalities. What rebates or similar agreements are being made for security? You don’t know?

Ms. Susan Capling: No, I’m not aware of that, other than to say that MCSCS is the accountable lead for security planning and they—

Mr. Paul Miller: MCSCS—define that in long form.

Ms. Susan Capling: I’m sorry; the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

Mr. Paul Miller: So they don’t confer with you. Wouldn’t their costs for security have either a positive or negative impact on your multi-party agreement with the municipality? You’ve only got so many dollars in the bank, and you mean to tell me that they don’t converse with you and tell you how much it’s going to overlap or undercut your ability to cut deals with the municipalities because of the costs? They don’t communicate with you, and you’re the hub?

Ms. Susan Capling: They are really two separate and distinct—

Mr. Paul Miller: So the answer would be no, then; they don’t communicate with you.

Ms. Susan Capling: Well, we communicate, but the discussions with the municipalities are two very separate and distinct processes.

Mr. Paul Miller: And you’re not privy to any of those discussions in your position?

Ms. Susan Capling: MCSCS is the lead.

Mr. Paul Miller: Are you privy to those discussions?

Ms. Susan Capling: No, not the conversations with the municipalities on the policing—

Mr. Paul Miller: So how can you set a budget or cut negotiations and deals with the municipalities when you’re not aware of the impact that security costs will have on your budget?

Ms. Susan Capling: The services I’m talking about here and that were contemplated for compensation in the MPA are a very separate set of services—street cleaning and waste management, for example.

Mr. Paul Miller: You said that, but you haven’t answered my question. Would it have a negative or positive impact, possibly, on your budget if you are not privy to or haven’t talked about the costs for security? Do you believe that it could have a negative impact on your budget, dealing with the municipalities?

Ms. Susan Capling: I think that they’re quite separate and distinct—

Mr. Paul Miller: Is that a yes or a no?

Ms. Susan Capling: Sorry; can you—

Mr. Paul Miller: Well, you’re running around. You’re telling me about the municipal agreements that you have, and I already understand that; I comprehend that. I know what municipalities provide—services in kind—and what they do. But I’m trying to get down to the fact that you haven’t answered me on whether the security costs could possibly have a negative impact on your budget, the deals you’re signing for all these services in kind through the municipalities, through your organization. You haven’t told me where the security group fits in. If they’re not talking to you about it, and you are one of the major planners, or the person to go to, the hub of that wheel, and the spokes are broken and you don’t know what’s going on, that could have a negative impact on the overall cost of the games.

I’m trying to find out why a person in your position would not be privy to or involved in those discussions, because it’s going to have an impact, either positively or negatively—I can’t say at this point—on your budget. You’re telling me you know nothing about it; you’ve got nothing to do with it. I’m surprised, at that level, with all the people who are involved, TO2015 and you and the ministry, and you report directly to the deputy minister—I’m surprised that you wouldn’t be involved in those discussions or know anything about it.

Anyway, we’ll move on. I think I’ve worn that out, but wow. The left hand should know what the right hand is doing.

Your colleague the director of infrastructure, responsible: Are any of the infrastructure projects legacy structures?

Ms. Susan Capling: Infrastructure is not my area. I’m not able to speak to that.

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. Do you know who is responsible for securing these sites during construction, after they’re ready, during the games and after? Have you had any involvement in the process for finalizing security agreements? You said no.

Ms. Susan Capling: No, I’m sorry. I don’t know.

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. When the games are over, how long will you work with the secretariat to do follow-up and closure?

Ms. Susan Capling: I haven’t been told that yet.

Mr. Paul Miller: So we don’t know what costs are involved in that or how long it will go on. You haven’t been privy to that, either.

Ms. Susan Capling: No.

Mr. Paul Miller: Thank you. Wow.

What are the responsibilities in terms of the end-of-games reports—what are your responsibilities in the end-of-games reports? Will you assess how the games were delivered, where they could have been improved, where the best value for the dollar occurred and where it didn’t?

I guess that question is going to be tough for you, because you’re telling me you are not privy to all the discussions about security and all that, so I don’t know if you’re going to be able to do a report after. Are you, just on your little bit that you are doing?

Ms. Susan Capling: I haven’t been told whether I have a responsibility to do a report or not after games time. Knowing what I know of the secretariat, there will be an interest in understanding the lessons learned and so forth. As public servants, we’re always interested in documenting lessons learned from any experience.

Sorry; I can’t—was there another question—

Mr. Paul Miller: Oh, there’s more. I’m really having problems with this line of questioning because you seem to be limited in your ability to answer because of whatever they’ve told you or—have you been told not to go into certain areas and not talk about them before you came?

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Chair?

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: Chair, that’s an unfair—

Mr. Paul Miller: That’s a fair question.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Continue.

Mr. Paul Miller: Thank you.

Ms. Susan Capling: I think—

Mr. Paul Miller: Yes, you have, or no, you haven’t?

Ms. Susan Capling: No, I think my answers reflect my role in the secretariat, which is a director. I report to an assistant deputy minister, who reports to the deputy, and then who reports to the minister. I think that as a director—I’ve been a director in, I think, four ministries now—you’re not always privy to information at all levels of the organization. I’m focusing my answers on the role that I do have.

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. In your role in games delivery, how crucial is adequate public transportation?

Ms. Susan Capling: That’s not an area that I cover. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, I work on coordinating, I work on municipal services agreements and furthering those, and I work on the integrated exercise program. There is another colleague in my division who works on the transportation plans in the Ministry of Transportation—

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. Do you foresee any agreements coming soon and being finalized with municipalities for transportation and security, or you wouldn’t know where they’re at?

Ms. Susan Capling: I can only speak to where we’re at in my area of the work, which is municipal services agreements. We’re beginning to sit down with a couple of municipalities now to have initial conversations. Then we will work as quickly as we can to speak to the rest of the municipalities, of which there are 15 games host municipalities and then eight upper-tier municipalities. So it is a fairly big job for us to sit down with those municipalities, have those conversations and complete the negotiations.

1430

Mr. Paul Miller: So once again, with your limited role—and you’ve stated what you’re responsible for, what you’re not privy to and what you are privy to. I’m assuming, and I may be wrong, that transportation and security are probably going to be the biggest costs for these games. The agreements you’re signing for services in kind with the municipalities certainly have a limit. Have you been given a limit in your budgeting of how much you can spend with the municipalities in the role you’re playing? Have you got a top end, and that’s it?

Ms. Susan Capling: I think that in the last technical briefing there was an estimated range put on paper for what the expectation is for the costs of municipal service agreements. That would be, I think, $15 million to $35 million—whatever was in the technical briefing there—and that is the estimated range of costs for the municipal services agreements.

Now, again, my role is about delivery and about the process of ensuring that we have a good conversation with the municipalities and with 2015, to ensure that there’s a very good conversation and identification of the services that we—

Mr. Paul Miller: I understand that your communication has to be important on delivery of services, but all this delivery of services will involve costs. It appears that you’ve got a range, but you really don’t know, because I asked you earlier—I’ll reiterate—if you felt that the costs for security and transportation would or would not have an impact on your budget, and you really didn’t give me an answer. You don’t know.

I’m assuming that it will have a huge impact on what you can do and where you can go with the communities and the municipalities that are hosting these venues, so I’m a little surprised—even if you’re 10% or 15% of the budget overall—that you are not involved in those kinds of discussions, because every overlap, every part of that wheel you described, every spoke, will have an impact on the hub, which is the base funding of $500 million for the games.

If you exceed it—or maybe go under; I don’t think it’ll be under—it’s going to change your whole perspective and your whole approach to the delivery of services with the municipalities. Maybe the municipalities will end up holding the bag and have to chip in if you can’t fulfill your mandate or you don’t have the funding to fulfill your mandate. Would that be a fair statement?

Ms. Susan Capling: Sorry; what was the question? Sorry.

Mr. Paul Miller: I don’t even know if I can repeat all of that myself, but anyways—you know what? I’m done. It’s okay. Thanks.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Thank you very much. You had two minutes left. Thank you. Ms. Damerla?

Ms. Dipika Damerla: To Rick first.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: Okay. Thanks.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Mr. Bartolucci.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: Thanks, Chair. Ms. Capling, thank you very much for appearing before us. I’m probably going to reference my questions from personal experience, so this will allow you an opportunity to get a glass of water if you want—

Ms. Susan Capling: Thank you.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: —because I just want to make sure that my fellow committee members know where I’m coming from, because I think it’s important.

The first question I am going to ask you, when I ask you a question, is going to be “What is your role?”, if you can define your role, because some of the fair questions that were asked of you were not your role, and you shouldn’t know the answers to them at this point in time.

I’m going to say that in the 1980s, Sudbury, Ontario, hosted the World Junior Games. The World Junior Games are the second-biggest event, after the Olympics, involving every country in the world. It was a tri-partnership—it was a multi-partnership, but the funding people were the city of Sudbury, the federal government and the provincial government.

Being a part of a city council that first advocated for the games, and then a part of the city council that had to make sure that at the end of the games everyone understood what had happened, I think it’s fair to say that we don’t have the answers to everything today. We probably won’t have the answers to everything the day of the games; we probably won’t have the answers to everything at the end of the games. It’ll be a culmination and a compilation of a whole bunch of things before we’re able to tell everybody what the final costs were. I think everybody understands that.

I think we should be deeply proud and honoured to be hosting these games. I think we’ll do the best job possible. I have every confidence in all of the municipalities who are involved, the federal government and the provincial government, as well as the organizing committee, to do an effective job.

But there are so many pieces to this. There are so many different jobs that people have to do. Unless you get involved in one of these things, you really don’t understand just how complex these things are.

Having set the framework of where I’m going to be asking a few questions, could you please tell me exactly what your responsibilities are?

Ms. Susan Capling: Perhaps I’ll start in the third part of my statement and talk a little bit about the integrated exercise program, because I think that will give the committee a bit more of a practical understanding, from a day-to-day perspective, of what one of my big responsibilities is.

Let me just step back and say that, as I understand it, it’s typical for large events and international multi-sport events to have what would be called an exercise program to test plans and to test the plans of partners together to ensure that there’s alignment and interoperability and that everyone understands each other’s role very well, and everybody understands how we will function at games time on a day-to-day basis. In fact, I understand that for VANOC there was a three-stage exercise program. Similar to that, we are planning, in coordination and co-operation between P/PAGS and the Office of the Fire Marshal and emergency management at MCSCS, to do an integrated exercise program in three stages.

There was the first stage of the exercise program in November, which had over 70 organizations represented of games partners. My staff, and staff of the Office of the Fire Marshal and emergency management, organized that. As you can imagine, with that many people in the room, it’s a lot of work to get that organized, to set the agenda and to get everyone there and go in for the day. The objectives of that exercise were to have an understanding at this level of the roles and responsibilities of all partners and a very early test of one possible scenario which could play out at games time, which was a high-heat scenario, and talk about what everyone would do in that scenario. It was a very good day. I think everyone found it quite productive, and consistent with the kind of thing that’s normally done for large events or international sports events.

There will be a second stage, which will take place in October 2014. In exercise language, there will be what are called tabletop exercises, where people get around a table and simulate what they would do—kind of, in real life; but around the table—to play through a possible scenario.

Then, as we get closer to games time—in the spring of 2015—there will be a final exercise where scenarios are tested even more comprehensively and deeply.

As I say, it’s a typical thing to do, and important to do, to ensure that the province is operationally prepared for the games. I give that by way of illustration of some of the things that I’m doing on a day-to-day basis. I hope that helps a little bit to describe some of how my staff and I are spending our time.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: I’m sure you’re very, very busy, and I thank you for outlining that.

Would it be safe to say that you’re in charge of coordinating planning for the municipal services of the games?

1440

Ms. Susan Capling: I wouldn’t say planning for the municipal services themselves, but coordinating, ensuring that we collectively achieve the agreements on the municipal services so that the municipalities can provide the additional services needed to support the games. The municipalities themselves are, of course, responsible for the provision of services, and I am responsible, along with my assistant deputy minister, for ensuring that the process, which will be quite comprehensive given the number of municipalities that will be involved and given the range of potential services that will be involved—it’s fairly comprehensive and time-consuming. I think it will take a fair amount of our time in the months to come. That function and the integrated exercise program will be, really, the core components of my branch’s job in the months to come.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: Would you say that it’s safe to say that from municipality to municipality, those municipal services will vary? Or are there consistent municipal services that you’ll be looking for in the various municipalities that are part of the games?

Ms. Susan Capling: I think all municipalities are unique. Obviously, big municipalities have different capacities etc. than smaller municipalities. There will be, I think, an interest in ensuring that services are consistent, but how each municipality delivers will be the subject of conversations to come. Of course, the sports and the venues in every municipality are different, so to say it’s going to be 100% consistent and completely the same across the board, I think, wouldn’t allow for the regional and municipal variations depending on the size of the municipality and the type and length of the event and the sport that’s going to be taking place.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: I just remember from the world juniors in Sudbury at the time, we were a two-tier government, both lower tier and upper tier. The lower tier was the one that bid on the games and got them, but the upper tier certainly wanted to be a part of it. Those seven municipalities had—I’d say because we were part of one—a struggle to find out what services we were going to be able to deliver for the particular venue or game that was going to be highlighted at a particular time.

You’re looking at some of the coordination of the municipal services. You said that the municipal services are pretty consistent. Just so that we’re all sure that we know what those services are, could you outline some of those services, please?

Ms. Susan Capling: Sure. Some of them are listed in the multi-party agreement. It could include things like emergency medical services, fire and rescue, street cleaning, park maintenance, parking operations and enforcement, garbage and recycling collection, traffic signal operation and maintenance, graffiti removal, water and sewer maintenance, street lighting, bylaw enforcement. There may be other municipal services that are eligible for compensation, but we’ll learn more about that and be open to those conversations when we actually get further down the road in those conversations with the municipalities.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: I think you’ve outlined, in the municipal services that you’re looking for, that this is a pretty complex execution of a plan. That’s for sure.

What are some of the unique challenges that you’re experiencing that you didn’t anticipate? Your branch would have anticipated a lot of the challenges, but it’s those unexpected occurrences that sometimes provide some angst to people who are planning events. What are some of the unexpected occurrences, and is there a mechanism to handle them from municipality to municipality?

Ms. Susan Capling: I can speak mostly from my perspective rather than the games as a whole. I think with regard to municipal services and moving forward on the municipal services agreements, the challenge is the complexity of the job at hand. As I say, I’ve been a director in four ministries now. This is a very complex partnership job with a lot of moving parts, if you like, and a lot of service pieces to coordinate. So it’s the complexity of the job at hand that I think is the most difficult challenge—from my perspective, anyway.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: I’m sure, from your perspective, that would be a big challenge.

Have you received the necessary understanding, first of all, from municipalities? Because if they don’t know what their role is, then it’s pretty difficult for a municipality to be able to fulfill what’s expected. I honestly believe that Mr. Miller had some very legitimate questions. In fact, municipalities have to know what is expected of them before they’re able to reach the expectation that you set for them. Has that been outlined at this point in time to all the municipalities, or is that still a work in progress?

Ms. Susan Capling: I’ll just step back a little bit and talk about the forums that are in place now to talk to the municipalities and to ensure that there’s really good and open communications across all games partners, because I believe there have been lots of communications with municipalities, and even though operational planning at the venue level and at the service level is not yet completed, there are a number of forums where all of us continue to talk to the municipalities.

One of them is that there is a regular municipal forum that’s led by Toronto 2015, the organizing committee itself, where they talk about what’s happening, what’s new, what’s going on in the organizing committee, what the municipalities can expect at any given time and what’s up and coming. Toronto 2015, as I say, leads that, but my understanding is that those are very well attended and there is lots of good information shared about games planning.

The secretariat itself, and my branch specifically, has helped to organize CAOs’ and city managers’ dialogues to keep the municipalities abreast of what’s coming up.

I think those are two key ways that we’ve kept the municipalities informed of what’s coming and what’s gone on to date.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: Again, I would relate and be quite honest with you, we advocated for the games. We made our presentation etc., and we won the games. Then we sat down and said, “What the hell do we do now? We’ve got these games. They’re coming to Sudbury. We want them to be the best games ever. Is there a blueprint that we can follow?” The Olympic committee said, “No, there is no blueprint, because every city that hosts the world juniors, every country that hosts the World Junior Games, does it a different way.” That really was very difficult for us to start from the foundation piece.

At the end of all of this, will there be a plan that another jurisdiction may be able to use in order to plan a multi-sport, multi-city games?

Ms. Susan Capling: Well, all games are different. Will there be one blueprint that everyone can follow? Given that all games are different, you can’t always take a template, if you like, from one game and apply it to the next games, because they’re all different in complexity and partners and in nature. But I’m sure that the province will want to document the lessons we’ve learned and that TO2015, as the games organizing committee, will also pass on its knowledge in the appropriate way. The committee may wish to speak to the games organizing committee a bit more about how it documents lessons learned from games to pass that on to another host jurisdiction.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: Ms. Capling, that’s the last question I have. I’m going to turn it over to Ms. Damerla, if she has a question. I just want to say thank you very much for what you and your branch are doing. It’s a very complex set of talks that you have to have with municipalities. It’s an ever-changing thing, which makes it even more complex for you. But I am confident from listening to you that, at the end of the day, I am sure that the municipal services will be in place and that we all, whether we live in Sudbury, Hamilton, Toronto or anywhere else, will be very, very proud of how we executed these particular games.

1450

I thank you for your ongoing work because, to be perfectly honest, having working on world juniors, the work is only beginning to get difficult as we move closer to the games. So good luck, and thank you for your efforts.

Ms. Susan Capling: Thank you very much.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you, Mr. Bartolucci. Ms. Damerla?

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Thank you, Chair. I just want to compliment Mr. Bartolucci for an excellent set of questions and for giving that perspective, because unlike some of us he has really actually been and knows the nuts and bolts of what it takes to bring games and pull it off. I really enjoyed that line of questioning. I learned a lot. Thank you so much.

I don’t have too many questions, but I do have one. In your opening remarks you mentioned that there’s a group that does partner engagement and then there’s your group, which does the games delivery. I was curious: What does that partner engagement involve? It seems like you are also engaging the three levels of government. I’m just trying to understand how their partner engagement is different from what you do.

Ms. Susan Capling: Fair enough. The partner engagement and legacy division that I was referring to in my opening remarks is actually another part of the secretariat. They’re under Mr. Harlow’s leadership. If you would like to understand more of the work in that division, you could connect with Mr. Harlow on that. I think he already made a presentation to the committee, but there’s lots of work in that area.

From my perspective, if I could give an example of where I and my branch work in partnership with all the games partner committees, it would be one of the coordinating committees that has all the games partners on it. Again, it’s the province, the federal government, the city of Toronto, COC and CPC. The committee that I’m referring to is called coordinating committee two. That committee is led by Toronto 2015, and it’s a very interesting forum to talk about issues that crosscut all games partners. That committee deals with the topical issues of the moment. It usually starts with an update from Toronto 2015 on games planning and milestones at the time. It might deal with and talk about other topical issues of the day. But I’m just sharing that with you to talk about a partnership piece that my branch and I are directly involved in in terms of being involved in the breadth of partners.

The other thing I would say is that the integrated exercise program itself has a tremendous range of partners involved with it: again, provincial ministries, federal ministries, municipalities, utilities and even some private sector organizations that might be impacted with respect to anything that happens at games time. That is also a tremendous and big partnership role that my branch is involved in.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Is one of your branch’s stakeholders the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, I guess, and the security piece through them?

Ms. Susan Capling: My branch in the secretariat works with a range of all provincial ministries providing services to the games. It’s not only MCSCS but MTO and other ministries providing essential services to the games.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Okay. Thank you very much.

Ms. Susan Capling: Thank you.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Ms. Damerla. We shall move to the opposition. Mr. Jackson?

Mr. Rod Jackson: Thank you. Thank you for coming, Ms. Capling. I know you’re a busy person and have lots to do, so we really do appreciate your time coming in today.

I just want to go back to the integrated exercise program. It caught my attention when you mentioned it in your opening statement. You answered a lot of my questions concerning it already, but I do have a couple more.

Can you explain to me—not in full detail, because we might be here all day because I’m sure it’s fairly involved: How do you test these plans, exactly? You talked a little bit about table-topping and all that, but can you give me an idea of what goes on and who’s involved when you talk about integrated exercise? I’m imagining there are other people involved. Is TO2015 involved? So three questions in one.

Ms. Susan Capling: Sorry; could you repeat the questions? I’ll try and answer each.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes. How do you test these plans? Who exactly is involved in the exercise program when you do them? And is one of those partners TO2015?

Ms. Susan Capling: Okay. So, I’m not an expert in exercise programs, but I do have knowledge. I’m really happy that my partners at the Office of the Fire Marshal and emergency management in federal government, who do these things all the time, are helping the secretariat to co-lead this role.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Sorry to interrupt you; are you the lead for the secretariat?

Ms. Susan Capling: Yes.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Okay.

Ms. Susan Capling: I understand that the techniques that will be used in this exercise are quite typical of other exercise programs, in that one has a conversation at some point in the exercise at this level about roles and responsibilities.

Then, as you get deeper into the exercise, you want to test things and simulate things a bit more and a bit more deeply, and actually role-play, so the second part of this exercise will be what’s called a tabletop exercise, where people will sit around a table like this, and a scenario or two will be thrown at them. They’ll actually act that out in real time and say what you would do if this were to happen. Partner A would give an answer or talk about what their role would be, partner B would give an answer and talk about what their role would be and what their response would be, and partner C would do the same thing.

Then, the third exercise will be more complex. The planning is still under way for those exercises, and I think that, in all likelihood, the specific plans will be laid down when we’re a bit further along into games planning itself and we know specifically where there is a need to probe a bit more.

Mr. Rod Jackson: And who are teams A, B, C and D? Who are those people who are at the table?

Ms. Susan Capling: At the first exercise, there were provincial ministries and there were games host municipalities. TO2015 participated in an observer role for the first exercise. Security was there.

Federal government departments will also be providing services and involved in the games, and some utilities and a couple of outsiders from government—the Canadian Bankers Association and the Red Cross—but the idea is to get all games partners who may have a role to play involved. I took good advice from the Office of the Fire Marshal and emergency management who have tremendous experience in these kinds of things in planning the exercises.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Most of this stuff is emergency-based—so external things that happen, i.e. weather, any sort of natural disaster or any sort of man-made disaster. Are those the kinds of scenarios that you’re running through in those exercise programs?

Ms. Susan Capling: The first scenario that we talked about at this level, in the first exercise, was a high-heat scenario and the potential impacts of that. We haven’t developed the scenarios or other pieces that we might test for the next parts of the games, and we’ll do that as we get a little bit closer into planning.

Mr. Rod Jackson: When you were asked to define your role, you used this as an example of a large piece of what you do. How long have you been doing this?

Ms. Susan Capling: My role at the secretariat?

Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes.

Ms. Susan Capling: I’ve been in the secretariat since September 2012. We started talking about this and planning, and I heard about it very early—I can’t remember exactly when—in my arrival at the secretariat.

Mr. Rod Jackson: And you’ve been through one scenario with high heat?

Ms. Susan Capling: Yes.

1500

Mr. Rod Jackson: Any others?

Ms. Susan Capling: No.

Mr. Rod Jackson: So since you’ve got there, you’ve been planning to test plans since 2012 and have only tested one?

Ms. Susan Capling: My understanding is that the sequencing of games exercises and the timing at which one does it before a games is typically spread out, because you want time for operational planning to evolve and for partners to have their operational plans finalized so you can test these things in a more detailed way.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Okay. How many people from the secretariat itself would be involved in the integrated exercise program?

Ms. Susan Capling: The staff responsibilities vary from time to time and everybody pitches in a little bit, but three to four—myself and three more of my staff—would be involved. They play a variety of different roles, but that’s approximately it.

On the day of the actual exercise itself, there are different groups that you have to facilitate. There are many big days like that. There’s a plenary in the morning and then you break out into groups where you actually talk about things. On that day, in the first exercise, we broke, first of all, into groups by sector to discuss issues; for example, there was a transportation sector group. Then, later in the day, we tested the scenario regionally, so we mixed up the different sectors and tested it regionally. For that day, we had a number of folks involved from the secretariat to help run the day and help facilitate those groups. With 70 organizations there and nearly 400 participants, it’s a big job to run that kind of day, both to plan it and to manage the day itself.

Mr. Rod Jackson: How involved is TO2015? TO2015 is charged with delivering the games, and you mentioned in your earlier comments that they were there as an observer. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that since they’re the main delivering body of the games, they would be highly involved in an integrated exercise program?

Ms. Susan Capling: It’s up to them, I think, to decide their role, but my understanding is that they’re going to be playing more deeply in the next set of exercises. Toronto 2015 sits on the steering committee with us to plan the exercise and to make sure that we’re covering off all the bases that we need to cover off in the exercise.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Okay. I just want to move—sorry, how much time, Chair?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Sixteen minutes.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Municipal service agreements: How many outstanding agreements or contracts are there to be signed with municipalities currently?

Ms. Susan Capling: We’re just beginning the process of the municipal service agreement process, so we haven’t signed any contracts at this point.

Mr. Rod Jackson: None?

Ms. Susan Capling: No.

Mr. Rod Jackson: What’s the collaboration and consultation process like leading up to this? Are you having regular meetings with them? Who are you talking to? Are you meeting with them together, individually? How is that working?

Ms. Susan Capling: We have done research before we entered into the process, first of all, at the secretariat, for example. We worked with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to understand the upper-tier and lower-tier responsibilities and to understand what typical regulatory tools or processes each municipality might have in place when they have a special event in their municipality. That was a piece of homework we did.

My branch spent a considerable amount of time with TO2015 transportation folks, understanding some of the local transportation requirements that might be needed at every venue or, for example, the street closures that might be needed, and just getting a little bit more familiarity with that. We talked to the CAOs about the municipal services agreements and talked to them about the process to come that they could expect at the mayors’ meeting that Minister Chan and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing hosted in February. We also talked to the mayors a little bit about the process and took their feedback on next steps.

Now we’re into what we call a pilot-period phase, where we’re sitting down with a couple of municipalities—one is the city of Toronto—and walking through—at a typical venue, and, in the case of the city of Toronto, a couple of venues, to talk about the unique challenges and the requirements and operational plans that might be unique and required for that venue, just to think a little bit about the challenges and the work that we’re going to face at every venue. We’ve talked to the municipalities about next steps going forward and what they can expect. We’re going to finish off the pilot phase, if you like, with the city of Toronto, with Ajax and, in all likelihood, with one other municipality. We’ll take a bit of a break and take stock of what we learned from there, and then, just as quickly as possible, we’ll move on to conversations with the rest of the municipalities.

I should also mention that in the first meetings with the city of Toronto, for example, we talked about a range of topics, including fire and emergency services. We’ll come back and have another conversation, and perhaps a few more to come on those things—in sum, to do a few pilot municipalities, really just to get an understanding of the range of challenges and the range of different operating requirements at different-sized venues, and then moving on to the rest of the games host municipalities from there, hoping to have agreements in principle by the late spring or early summer as much as possible.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Do you not think it’s a little bit of a case of putting the cart before the horse to have some of the integrated exercise programs going ahead when in fact in some of those scenarios, whether it’s high heat or whatever else you’re going to exercise in the future—to not have the first responders from those municipalities a part of that? They’re the ones that are going to be really delivering the service—whether it’s a fire department or a police department or a local hospital, what have you. How many municipal partners are there? Eight? Am I right, in that ballpark?

Ms. Susan Capling: There are 15 games host municipalities and eight upper-tier.

Mr. Rod Jackson: That’s significant. And it’s fairly unique to these games too, to have the games spread out around southern Ontario like that. I think it’s a good thing. But it is tricky. That must cause you some concern. It causes me some concern that we have all these municipalities without an agreement. I guess we’re assuming that these agreements are going to actually happen without any glitches or problems, which I think might be a little bit optimistic. I’d hate to say that there’s going to be a problem. I’m not going to say that, but certainly with that many agreements and that many city councillors—I’ve sat on city council, and I know how unstable they can be at times, especially if you happen to have a council that doesn’t like the way things are going. What’s your prognosis for that? With no municipal services agreements in place yet, and planning already starting, how do you reconcile that?

Ms. Susan Capling: What I can tell you is, my job is to make things move along as best as possible, and to find solutions to problems. I think what I can also say is that there is a common interest in moving the agreements and the conversations along just as quickly as possible. The province wants to move things along; the municipalities want to move things along. So it’s in everyone’s best interest to keep things moving and get a start as quickly as possible and complete as quickly as possible.

Mr. Rod Jackson: What kind of costs are involved? If you can give me a ballpark—different municipalities are going to have different responsibilities, depending on the size and scope of what’s happening in their communities. For example, in Hardwood Hills up in Oro-Medonte, they’re hosting mountain biking. They’re probably going to have to have less ready to go than, say, the still-water stuff in Niagara. So I understand there’s a difference, but what kind of costs are they looking at? Are they going to have any surprises with these municipal service contracts—added costs that they didn’t foresee?

1510

Ms. Susan Capling: I think that the reason we’re sitting down with them. Part of the goal of sitting down with them is a no-surprises environment. There will be a good conversation going forward, a very open conversation with TO2015 at the table. We need to remember that TO2015, at the venue level, is the key planner, so TO2015 is at the table with us on municipal services agreements. They are well positioned to identify what services are going to be needed. TO2015 already has good conversations with municipalities in a number of ways—

Mr. Rod Jackson: Who negotiates the municipal service agreements? The secretariat, P/PAGS or TO2015?

Ms. Susan Capling: It’s a joint effort between the secretariat, Mr. Casey, my assistant deputy minister, and TO2015 itself.

Mr. Rod Jackson: What happens if you have a glitch? What happens if you have a major blowout as far as the agreements are concerned? If the city of Hamilton can’t agree with some of the cost overruns—I’m just speaking hypothetically—what happens if they don’t like the deal they’re getting? They must have an idea of how much these are going to cost. You say there’s no surprises, but until a contract is signed, it’s not signed. I think everyone around this table has been in those situations where you think you’ve got a deal and then you don’t when you learn about some surprises.

I find it very strange that they’re not all signed already, let alone none of them being signed. I’m actually quite surprised to hear that and that planning is going ahead without them in areas that they’re going to have responsibility.

Sorry, how much time do I have left?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Seven twenty-five.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Okay. I guess what I’m trying to say is, what is the fail-safe here? If you run into a problem and a municipality doesn’t want to ante up because it’s more than they thought it would be, or there are certain improvements they need to make or whatever, and they don’t want to do it—or maybe they feel like they don’t like the way things have been organized or the way things are running, and they don’t want to be a part of it anymore. Without these agreements signed, that’s well within their purview, is it not?

Ms. Susan Capling: I think everyone at the table has a solutions- and results-oriented focus. Everyone has a strong interest in ensuring the games are a success. There will be a good discussion at the table about what services are needed and what appropriate compensation would be. We’ve got 15 months before the games—

Mr. Rod Jackson: That’s not very long.

Ms. Susan Capling: No, no.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Time does fly very quickly.

Ms. Susan Capling: Yes.

Mr. Rod Jackson: So there’s no fail-safe is what you’re telling me.

Ms. Susan Capling: I’m quite confident that everyone has got a vested interest and a strong interest in making sure that we collectively succeed here.

Mr. Rod Jackson: If ifs and buts were nuts.

Okay. Thank you very much for coming. I appreciate your time.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): We’ll move to round two, which is a 10-minute round. We will start with the NDP. Mr. Miller.

Mr. Paul Miller: I’m sure it’s not easy for you being on the hot seat, but we’ve got to ask the tough questions.

I went over your presentation. It’s sending me mixed messages. It says here, “P/PAGS’ responsibilities include oversight of the province’s $500-million investment in Toronto 2015, the games organizing committee; planning and delivery of key elements of the government’s celebration and legacy strategy; coordination with other levels of government, including the federal government and games host municipalities; and coordination”—this is the part that I’m a little surprised at—“with other provincial ministries with planning and delivery lead in specific areas.” Would that include the ministry of public safety?

Ms. Susan Capling: You mean the federal—

Mr. Paul Miller: No, no, provincial: the OPP, provincial safety, the MCS. It says here that you do work with other ministries, and you said you don’t.

Ms. Susan Capling: I work, as the secretariat does, with other ministries at a high level to understand what’s going on there, to understand—

Mr. Paul Miller: So you do communicate with them. You told me you don’t before.

Ms. Susan Capling: I think what I said, and I’ll try and clarify it if I miscommunicated, is that the secretariat does talk to other ministries and understands their plans at a high level, but the ministries delivering the provincial services to the games themselves are the accountable leads. They’re the keepers of the detailed plans. They’re the—

Mr. Paul Miller: They don’t share the detailed plan with you?

Ms. Susan Capling: No, as a matter of fact, they do—not always the most detailed plans. One example of coordination, if this helps to answer your question at all, is that—

Mr. Paul Miller: Not really. You also said here that you have three areas that you take care of. The first one is probably the one that sticks out in my mind the most. It says “risk management and financial oversight division.”

Ms. Susan: So I—

Mr. Paul Miller: No, before you go on, wouldn’t the financial oversight of the games, of the $500-million investment, include security and things like that? To me, financial oversight means an overall picture of where you’re going so that you can get a handle on what you can do with the municipalities with what’s left over after all these other things are met.

In your third thing, you say “games delivery,” in which, obviously, safety plays a huge role, “and infrastructure division.” Infrastructure would include policing, because you have Jersey barriers, you have fencing, you have safety, you have areas that are secluded for the athletes, whether it’s the village or the venues they’re performing in that require special infrastructure buildings to keep the public safe as well as the athletes. It’s one of your main three things here, yet you tell me that you don’t have anything to do with protection of the public. That’s a separate entity, you said. But it still falls within the $500 million, I’m sure.

Ms. Susan Capling: Sorry, can you clarify the question for me?

Mr. Paul Miller: I can go back. Let’s start off with the first one. You said “risk management and financial oversight division.” Financial oversight, to me, means that you’re overseeing the cost of the games. You’re the intermediate between the ministry, TO2015 and the money that transpires between the government on their share—the feds put $500 million in, you put $500 million in etc. So your particular department is responsible for financial oversight. You’ve said it in your statement. Yet you tell me you don’t have access—previously, we discussed, I asked you questions, and you told me you don’t have access to the cost of the security. It’s a separate entity, you told me. As Mr. Bartolucci pointed out, the municipality has to know what it’s going to cost for their police to be provided for the venues. That would be a municipal contract between the government and the municipality for the Hamilton and regional police to be involved. That would fall under financial oversight, I assume, or am I wrong?

Ms. Susan Capling: I should clarify that these three divisions that I’ve talked about in my opening remarks are each led by separate ADMs at P/PAGS—

Mr. Paul Miller: Do they report to you?

Ms. Susan Capling: No. I’m a director. A director reports to an ADM, so I am, on the hierarchy, lower than the ADM. Then the ADM reports to the deputy minister—

Mr. Paul Miller: But aren’t you part of the secretariat?

Ms. Susan Capling: Yes. I’m one branch in the third division that’s mentioned there, the games delivery and infrastructure division. So my role is confined to the areas that I’ve spoken about.

Mr. Paul Miller: Wow. All I can say is wow. Okay.

There’s one more. It says that you’re “supporting, coordinating” and “participating in various tables with provincial ministries”—various provincial ministries. The ministry of public safety does not fall within that auspice? Is that what you’re telling me? They wouldn’t be included in the provincial ministries you deal with?

Ms. Susan Capling: I deal with a range of provincial ministries, so—

Mr. Paul Miller: Including them?

1520

Ms. Susan Capling: Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services? Yes, I do.

Mr. Paul Miller: You do?

Ms. Susan Capling: I do deal with them, but I also deal with lots of other ministries.

Mr. Paul Miller: Would they not discuss security costs with you?

Ms. Susan Capling: Yes, at a high level.

Mr. Paul Miller: You told me they didn’t before. Now you say they do.

Ms. Susan Capling: At a high level, we have a discussion about the security costs, but we do not get into the detailed operational plans. The MCSCS or the OPP doesn’t deal with the detailed operational security planning.

Mr. Paul Miller: So you deal with them, but they’re not telling you the whole story. Okay.

You said this yourself: Your “branch focuses on coordination of provincial services to the games and helps to ensure provincial planning is integrated with Toronto 2015 planning”—integrated. You’ve told me that you’re the third group, which is infrastructure, so you are involved with TO2015 in planning infrastructure requirements for the venues and the cost of those, because you are part of the overall planning—you said in your statement—for the games. So I’m assuming that you would know what the infrastructure costs are going to be for security costs other than just the policing. I’ve mentioned Jersey barriers and fencing. These are all things that have to be built into the venues to keep the public in or out—whatever they want to do with it—so that is certainly going to be very costly. So you have had discussions with them about that, I’m assuming, if you’re in charge of infrastructure.

Ms. Susan Capling: I’m not in charge of infrastructure. My assistant—

Mr. Paul Miller: I thought you were the third one here.

Ms. Susan Capling: No, no.

Mr. Paul Miller: Games delivery and infrastructure.

Ms. Susan Capling: That’s my division. My division is led by an assistant deputy minister, my boss.

Mr. Paul Miller: And he doesn’t tell you anything that is going on?

Ms. Susan Capling: He does tell me things that are going on, but my conversations with my boss focus on my role.

Mr. Paul Miller: I’m not getting too far here, so thank you for coming in. I’m a little frustrated here.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Mr. Bartolucci.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: Ms. Capling, first of all, I want to thank you for trying to answer the questions to the best of your ability and as fully as you could possibly answer them. I think we all appreciate that.

I’m going to refer to something that Mr. Jackson said because he really, really is giving you wise advice, and I hope you and your branch and your ADM are listening. Municipalities are a very, very interesting set of creatures. Mr. Jackson, Mr. Miller, Mr. Fraser, and I—I don’t know if Laurie was a member of council before or not—are all former council members. When Mr. Jackson says it’s going to be a complex set of negotiations with each of the individual municipalities, I honestly believe that he is giving you very, very wise insight based on experience he, Mr. Miller, Mr. Fraser and I have had because we sat on councils—Grant as well. Sorry; we can’t forget the mayor.

I would suggest that you listen carefully to what he said and try to have those negotiations as quickly and as fully as you possibly can. I know you say here you’re going to be meeting with the city managers and the chief administrative officers, but trust me: They go to council for permission. That’s where you’re going to have some selling to do, because all politicians, I think, are cognizant of the bottom line. Municipal politicians, being the closest to the people—we could all agree with that—certainly understand that there will be questions. Mr. Jackson offers good advice to you, and I would support that advice. Try to start those negotiations early.

I’ve got to say as well that Mr. Miller is asking legitimate questions. I think most of the questions that he asked have something very, very complex that’s going to have to happen until you get to the bottom line with municipalities. I think he too is giving you wise information and saying, “It’s time to start that discussion and get the agreements in order.”

So I think we’ve listened to the dialogue. I’m going to move away from this. I’m going to talk a little bit about the World Junior Games in Sudbury. The entertainment: Do you have anything to do with that?

Ms. Susan Capling: The World Junior Games in Sudbury?

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: No, not at the World Junior Games; at the games.

Ms. Susan Capling: I don’t personally. I can’t wait to attend, but I’m not leading the entertainment or the festival planning.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: Okay. I’ll just talk from personal experiences. Some of the biggest difficulties we had with the World Junior Games was ensuring that we had the proper venues for the entertainment we brought in, and we didn’t think about that. We had the opening night outside. It was a beautiful summer evening in Sudbury. We had the opening exercises at Laurentian University, one of the most beautiful universities in all of Ontario, Canada and, I think, the world, just because of where it’s located, on the shores of Ramsey Lake. Anyway, the opening act was Roy Orbison, and the main feature was the Beach Boys. For some of us who are dating ourselves, they were big entertainment back in the 1980s.

We had no idea the numbers of people that would come out to the opening exercises. We told everybody there were going be lots of people. But, boy, “lots” was newly defined when we saw just how many people we did have. That’s why security questions are so important. The reality is, you have to plan for the unplanned, for the unknown.

In your discussion with your branch, or with your ADM, because this is a multi-faceted game that has multi locations attached to it, that job is going to get a lot more difficult, because you’re going to have entertainment opening exercises at each of the venues, probably.

Again, just a bit of caution. I think you’re working as hard as you possibly can. Personally, I’m very confident that you will do your job very adequately. I thank you for being as open as you possibly can with trying to answer our questions. I think—John, unless you have something. No? Good.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Mr. Bartolucci. We’ll move to Mr. Jackson from the opposition.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Thank you. I just want to take a moment to thank you for coming in today. Again, I know you’re very busy, and you have lots of work to do. So, with that, I will waive my 10 minutes and bid you adieu.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. You’re off the hook early. We do really appreciate you coming forward and answering the questions to the best of your ability based on your responsibilities.

Ms. Susan Capling: Thank you for the opportunity.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): You’re quite welcome.

We’ll take almost a 10-minute break, if that’s okay, just to re-set up. The Chair needs a break.

The committee recessed from 1528 to 1546.

COACHES ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I’d like to call the meeting back to order. We have before us our second delegation. From the Coaches Association of Ontario, we have Susan Kitchen, executive director, and Sheilagh Croxon, chair. I’d like to welcome the both of you, and thank you for coming before the committee this afternoon. The way this works is that you’ll have a five-minute presentation to commence, and that will be followed by a 25-minute round of questioning or comments from each of the individual parties—up to 25 minutes—and then followed by another 10-minute round of questioning.

It’s great to have you here. For Hansard purposes, if you just want to introduce yourselves, and then the floor is yours to begin your five-minute presentation. Thanks for coming.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Great. My name is Susan Kitchen, and I’m the executive director of the Coaches Association of Ontario.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: I’m Sheilagh Croxon, the chair of the Coaches Association of Ontario.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Standing Committee on General Government. Today, I have here with me the chair of our organization, Ms. Sheilagh Croxon. Sheilagh is a very successful Olympic synchronized swimming coach, who used her coaching and innovative leadership to lead her team to a bronze medal at the 2000 Olympics in Sydney, and to a silver medal in Atlanta as the national team assistant coach. She has coached Canadian athletes to 30 international medals in her career—and, I should say, “so far.” She is very much active in the Canadian sport scene and is currently the head coach of the Granite Club synchronized swimming program. Sheilagh is sought after worldwide for her accomplishments as a coach on and off the pool deck. I am sure you will want to ask her about her experience coaching at the Pan Am Games in Winnipeg in 1999, on Canadian soil.

We also have here Mr. Jeremy Cross, our director of coach education, who works for the Coaches Association of Ontario. In his spare time, Jeremy coaches girls’ basketball in the Toronto Lords program, and this past weekend, can claim success with a bronze at the under-18 provincial championships held in Brampton.

Our working mantra is “coaches helping coaches” for good reason: Our organization benefits from the thoughtful leadership provided by many successful coaches in Ontario.

I have been the executive director of the Coaches Association of Ontario since its beginning in 2002. Working with and for coaches has been incredibly motivating and inspiring, every step of the journey. We learned quickly how much we could accomplish for our province by focusing our efforts on recruiting, educating and celebrating one of Ontario’s greatest resources: our coaches.

Since close to 90% of coaches who coach in Ontario are volunteers, this is where 90% of our association’s effort is focused.

The government of Ontario plays an important supporting role in enabling our programs. Ontario has one of the most active and far-reaching adult education programs in the country for coaches. Each year, there are about 20,000 new coaches taking training somewhere in Ontario. Specifically, the government has provided our organization with a three-year transfer payment agreement that sets out an annual contribution of $282,000. We use those funds carefully to offset the administration of training of the NCCP, the National Coaching Certification Program. It’s a well-recognized national standard for all sport coaches and community leaders in recreation.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Sorry to interrupt, but could you just move back or move your mike a bit so that we don’t get that reverb?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Sorry about that.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you. Sorry to interrupt.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: The program is available in both official languages, is offered in modules and can be offered in a classroom, in a gym or online. This past year, as an example, we hosted 420 facilitator-led multi-sport workshops on weekends and evenings to reach 6,668 coaches.

The funding provided by the government ensures that this program is accessible from a cost perspective. Our courses range from $25 to $155 dollars, quite manageable for a community program. These costs are the same even if we’re doing this in Timmins in French for 12 young leaders or in Hamilton for 40 soccer coaches.

This spring, whether it’s soccer, baseball or archery, there are going to be more active Ontarians who have a knowledgeable coach who has a tool kit of age-appropriate practice plans and an understanding of how to prevent concussions, and who can make good, ethical decisions every step of the way.

One of our priorities is to ensure that every community and every young participant is supported by a knowledgeable coach, a coach with the tools and the confidence to make a child feel that they can progress in sport and in life, and the skill to put a win or a loss into perspective, instill attitudes of respect in team players and provide a safe environment for being physically active. We believe that, like no other role in a young person’s life, the coach’s role is to see a person for their possibility—not for who they are today, but for who they can become.

In the past six months, the Coaches Association has had the opportunity to organize workshops that trained 832 young leaders—567 women and 266 young men—who are working in after-school agencies all across the province. The workshop was in fundamental movement skills, which teaches physical literacy and is a great start in coaching.

Perhaps as a result of our success with the NCCP, the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport asks us each year to deliver a range of coaching initiatives under Quest for Gold. We are in the third year of a second transfer-payment agreement that distributes $726,000 each year to ensure that coaches stay in Ontario and achieve the professional development that they need. I can confidently say, having run this program for six years, that there has been a turnaround and Ontario is now the province to be a coach.

The 2015 Pan/Parapan Am Games will provide an incredible opportunity that aligns with our mission and goals, and our passion for all things coaching. We are partnering with the city of Toronto to train 2015 community coaches in recreation centres in 2015 for free. While these coaches will not coach at the 2015 games, as a result of this campaign, leagues and community recreation programs will be supported by a trained NCCP coach. This initiative is called Let’s Get Coaching.

We are currently collaborating with a number of Ontario and national partners to create an education pathway for coaches who work with persons with a disability. There are 1.85 million persons with a disability in Ontario, or 15%; sadly, only 3% are involved in organized sport, compared with 6% of the able-bodied population. As a result of the games’ legacy initiative, we are well on our way to ensure that a coach who has a young person with a disability wheel up to the sport practice won’t be turned away because the coach did not know how to involve the person in his or her program.

Hosting the 2015 Pan/Parapan Am Games provides momentum for those of us who work in sport to collaborate and come together in such projects. Our goal is to increase participation, since, particularly for persons with a disability, the positive impact on health and independence is profound. We want the coaches, and those who are inspired to become coaches, to be ready when a parent sees what is possible through the games for their son or daughter.

In everything that we do, and in large part because of our leadership and who we are, we make sure that Ontario coaches feel valued in Ontario for what they do. If we accomplish this, as we hope, more citizens will pick up a whistle or stopwatch and give their time to help develop a young person through sport.

We hope, through the eyes of a caring and knowledgeable coach, that young people will become caring citizens. Some might say that we build coaches who build athletes, but I think we are really in the business of building good citizens.

Thank you for allowing this opportunity today.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much for coming. In your introductory remarks we went over about two and a half minutes, but I did have approval from Ms. Damerla. So the government has 22 minutes and 30 seconds.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Thank you, Chair. I’d like to begin by welcoming both Ms. Kitchen and Ms. Croxon here. Thank you very much.

Ms. Croxon, this question is directed to you. I heard Ms. Kitchen say that you had coached athletes in the 1999 Pan/Parapan games. Can you tell me how coaching has changed since 1999 to 2014 here in Ontario today?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Well, I think there has been an influx of funding, which is making more professional working conditions for professional coaches. I’ve been very involved not only in the Coaches Association of Ontario but also Coaches of Canada, which is our professional body, and I think that there has been a shift to better contractual agreements for coaches. So instead of hiring coaches on one-year agreements, at the national level we’re seeing a trend to four-year agreements and things like that—the understanding that, really, the foundation of any great team is the coach and that we need to have consistency. I think that’s one major shift that we’ve seen over this period of time.

I also think that the coach education system is really improving and is becoming more accessible to more people. I think that accessibility is allowing people to raise their knowledge and skills. A lot of the work that we’re doing at the Coaches Association is really directed at that.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Leading up to these games here in Ontario we’re building a lot of new stadiums and a lot of new facilities. Tell me, as a coach, what do these new facilities mean to you and your athletes?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Well, I think this is such a great opportunity to inspire the next generation of kids to get involved in sport. The facilities really are going to lay the foundation not only for excellence in athletic training, but for those young people who see the games and then have access to the facilities, I think we’ll see a major rise in participation in the sports that are featured in the games. So that’s really, really exciting, because sport is one of the very few places in today’s society where you can really learn the fundamental values like teamwork, giving and respect that are pretty lost in a lot of the fast age of technology.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: I heard you actually reference the next generation. You were really speaking to the legacy piece of these venues, right?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Yes.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: That is something that this government has done very differently with these games, which is that we have planned the legacy of the games from the very beginning. Traditionally, you build, you host the games and then you worry about what you’re going to do with all of those legacy pieces. Something that we’ve been trying to do differently this time around is to worry or think about what we’re going to do with those legacy pieces even before they’re built. I just wanted to know what your thoughts were on that sort of thinking.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Well, my background is in aquatics, so Toronto, for the size of the city, has very few pools that are equipped to host national or international events or to even provide training to the aquatic sports. So we’re super excited about the opportunities to access the Scarborough centre and the Markham centre for events and also for training purposes. I think that there’s not going to be any problem with aquatics, I can tell you. I can’t speak as much to the other sports, because that is my background, but maybe Susan can.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Now that we have this aquatics centre in Scarborough, what does it mean for the athletes? What I’ve been hearing from other witnesses who have come forward is how Ontario or Canadian athletes, because of a lack of facilities, have had to travel a lot to train. Tell me a little about how that impacts an athlete, having to travel. What is the upside now of not having to travel and being able to train right here in Toronto or in Ontario?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Well, I think that when young athletes have to leave their family, it’s very difficult. I know; I ran a centralized training program for the national team. It was the first centralized training program when we were leading up to the Sydney games. I had athletes from all over Canada who had to relocate here and we trained out of the Etobicoke Olympium.

1600

It’s very difficult, but we’re a team sport and we’re always going to need to be centralized. There is always going to be a need to centralize athletes in a team sport, but in an individual sport, they will be able to access it more in their own backyard. Hopefully with the anchor clubs that can train out of these facilities, it will be a pathway that they can stay on and follow in that facility all the way up through their journey. I think that being able to stay at home with their family and being able to train where you choose your education is also really important.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: What about in terms of costs and performance outcomes? Is there any impact comparing having a venue at home, as opposed to having to travel around a circuit?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Well, certainly on a family, it would lower the costs. If you have to go to other places to get coaching, to be able to access a facility, even to drive across the city from Kitchener—I have athletes who come to train with me who live in Guelph. The sacrifice on the family—if we can have more centres in different places, it’s going to expand sport, grow everything and be better for all Ontarians and their lifestyle.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: One of the other things that we have deliberately chosen to do in this set of games is that instead of centralizing all of the venues in, say, one big city, which would have perhaps been Toronto, we have chosen to spread them all across the southern GTA. Tell me, from a coaching perspective, from an athlete’s point of view, what your thoughts are on that.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: I think it’s amazing for the development of the province as a whole. We’re often criticized for everything being in Toronto, and it’s really, really important to get out to as many areas as you can. So I think it’s a very, very good decision on the part of the government.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Beyond the sports stadium or the velodrome, there’s the athletes’ village as well that’s being built. I just wanted to know: Have you heard of it? Have you been to it? What do you think of it? What are your thoughts?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: I haven’t, personally, but I think Susan has.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Yes, I was there on a tour that was opened up to the sport community. I think it was a very good prospect, and it was nice to see the neighbourhood unfolding.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Earlier I learned that the Canadian sport organization is now going to relocate, I guess, to the Scarborough facility. Tell me, what does that mean for Ontario to now have the CSO here at home?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: I think that’s going to be wonderful. To have all of the sports science and the leading technology in a state-of-the-art facility will be really, really great for the athletes, for coaches, for accessing knowledge, and just for being in a community of practice where you’re basically exchanging every day with like-minded professionals. I think it will really increase innovation and creativity, and move performance to the next level.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: A few weeks ago, I was at a local grocery store and we had little Pachi over there and the kids were all taking pictures. So there’s some excitement growing in the schools, as well as here at the ministry and with all of us. Tell me, from the athletes and the coaches, what’s going on in the lead-up to the 2015 games. What are the athletes feeling? How’s it going to be playing on home turf and all that stuff?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: I think that for athletes that have an opportunity to be part of the games and who can see themselves there, it’s obviously a very, very exciting time. I think a lot of them are involved in different initiatives and different promotions and things like that. The more opportunities they have to do things like that, the more it makes it real for them. It’s a great lead-up to the Olympic Games as well, so we have a lot of athletes who have their sights set on being in Rio. So yes, I think that over the next year, the excitement is just going to continue to build.

Ms. Dipika Damerla: Thank you so much.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: You’re welcome.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. Mr. Jackson.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Thank you for coming in today. I really appreciate your time, taking you away from your busy day, I’m sure.

Sheilagh, did I read somewhere that you went to Ridley College?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: I did.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Me too.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Did you?

Mr. Rod Jackson: “Terar dum prosim,” yes.

I just have a couple of quick questions for you. Who—and you might have mentioned this and I might have missed it, so forgive me if I did. Who funds the association? Where does all your funding come from?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Certainly a large percentage comes from the Ontario taxpayers. We’re very grateful. The agreements are administered through the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. We have, in the past, received project funding from the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration for special projects and, at the very beginning, from the Ontario Trillium Foundation.

Mr. Rod Jackson: What’s your annual budget?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: It’s close to about $1.7 million.

Mr. Rod Jackson: You mentioned some of the things that you do. Actually, I’m going to change angles a little bit here. Do you have any sort of mandate to help coach people with disabilities, for example, or any sort of Paralympic-type sports?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Absolutely. I think our mandate is really to make sure our programs are accessible, in all forms of that word, whether it’s a remote community or working with coaches who work with athletes for disability. We have offered courses with ASL translation for deaf coaches.

I’m really excited—we’re now working with the Canadian Paralympic Committee and ParaSport Ontario. This is one of the pre-legacies of the games in that we’ve already started to collaborate. We’ve learned some lessons about the UK Paralympics, the excitement, and that perhaps the community wasn’t really ready when people did get excited and want to participate in sport. Our association is on that committee as a partner organization, looking at what we can do differently for coaching and to help develop some multi-sport programming to eliminate the fear that coaches might have or not understanding what to do. I’m quite excited about that partnership and that program.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Okay. That’s good to know.

I’ve been to a couple of conferences over the past couple of years, and one of them was actually really interesting. It was about how coaching is done differently in the States, how we’re so far behind in how seriously we take our coaching in Canada and how we need to start taking it more seriously if we want to have more world-class athletes and if we want to have a higher level of performance. There’s a bunch of reasons why that is, how we can change it and that sort of thing, but I think what you guys are doing is a great leap in that direction. I’m really inspired by what you do, and I know probably a lot of young people are as well. So congratulations and kudos to you.

With that, Chair, I’m—

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Along that line, I was at an event with Huntsville last week. Toben Sutherland was the coach of Dara Howell, who won the gold medal for that community and is still celebrated to this day with signs all over the windows. Toben Sutherland was supported through a Quest for Gold grant, and was taken from a volunteer position to a full-time professional coaching position. That led to his opportunity as a national team coach and a coach at the Sochi games. It’s tremendous for her and her community to have that success.

Mr. Rod Jackson: How many—sorry, I thought I was done, but I guess I’m not. How many coaches belong to your association?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: About 7,000.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Oh, really? Significant, yes. Do you just decide you want to join and pay a fee? How does that work?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Yes. Well, coaches certainly will sign up on our website and become a member through that, so it’s really an opt-in.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Yes.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: We also have about 15,000 newsletter subscribers to what we put out and produce, so that’s in addition.

Mr. Rod Jackson: If someone joins your association, what kind of benefits and access—what do they get?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: We certainly encourage them to come to participate in our professional development such as our coaches’ conference, the Ontario Coaches Conference. We provide service, really, around information and providing resources and different programs.

Our role and our mandate is really to connect the Ontario coaching community, and to connect it in the best possible way. So it’s also finding opportunities to connect them to each other, with skills, because a great thing happen when coaches of different sports get together. The rowing coach can learn a lot from the sledge hockey coach and the lacrosse coach and the figure skating coach. I know Sheilagh has spoken to athletics coaches about her sport. That really is our mandate and our role, to connect the sport community through its coaches in different ways.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Good. Thank you. You’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Mr. Jackson. We’ll move to the NDP. Mr. Miller.

Mr. Paul Miller: Good morning, ladies. Sheilagh—

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Afternoon.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Afternoon.

1610

Mr. Paul Miller: Oh, it is afternoon, isn’t it?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: It’s almost evening.

Mr. Paul Miller: It’s almost evening. I’ve been so busy I forgot what time of day it was. Oh, well. That happens when you get over 60. Whatever.

It’s funny. Sheilagh, you’re involved with swimming.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Synchronized swimming.

Mr. Paul Miller: Synchronized, oh. My aunt was involved in the first Pan Am Games in Hamilton. She worked with Jimmy Thompson. He was an Olympian. She taught for 30 years, 200 and 100 breaststroke for budding Olympians. So that’s kind of nice to have.

I coached many years, too, hockey and baseball and lots of other things, so I know what a coach goes through. We appreciate you’re the unsung heroes. It’s great. You should get the appreciation and thanks that you deserve. I believe all coaches, volunteers—sometimes there’s hundreds of thousands of volunteers that put a lot of time in to help kids, and that’s great.

Now I get to the heavy-duty stuff. I’m the bad news bear here.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: That’s okay.

Mr. Paul Miller: This committee is looking at the Pan/Parapan American Games. We have specifically been looking at the tendering of contracts and, generally, financial oversight. With that in mind, why do you feel the government called you as witnesses?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: I’d like to think we’re a good example.

Mr. Paul Miller: Yes, but you really don’t have anything to do with the finances, right?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: We have no involvement with the—

Mr. Paul Miller: It’s like a promotion kind of thing? I’m not sure why you were—

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Oh, I don’t know about that. I don’t really follow it that closely, but there has been a huge shift since there’s been the change in leadership with the new person coming in. I know somebody who works at the organization, and they just said that everything is under lock and scrutiny. I don’t know. I mean, that’s how you—the main thing, it was corrected, whatever happened. So I think that’s—

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. It’s not really what this committee was after. I understand—

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Okay. Well, I’m trying to answer the question.

Mr. Paul Miller: I understand. Okay. Have you been following any of the newsreels regarding the security contracts and transportation things? Have you been bothered with that?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Not really.

Mr. Paul Miller: So you wouldn’t know anything about Contemporary International and its subsidiaries that are going to provide protection at the games? Nothing—

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Our relationship with the government is really around our program, so we don’t really—

Mr. Paul Miller: Yes, that’s the point I was trying to get to: I’m not quite sure why you’re here. But, anyway, I love to hear from coaches, don’t get me wrong.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: We think we’re here because we do a good job.

Mr. Paul Miller: Oh, there’s no doubt about you doing a good job. I’m not quite sure if it falls into the mandate we’re looking for here.

Who invited you to attend this committee? Was it the government? The Clerk’s office? Was it the Liberal government? Who invited you?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: The letter came from the Clerk.

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. And who wrote you the request?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I think all three parties submit a list of potential—

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. All right. So it came from the government.

With all the garbage that goes on about money and transportation and all that, all the concerns that people have, what’s the morale and general attitude of the athletes and the coaches? Do they not even bother with that stuff and just do what they got to do, kind of thing?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Yes. You know, athletes and coaches are very focused on what they need to do, and that’s the business of winning medals and representing their country. Every games that I’ve been involved in, every Olympic Games, there’s always controversy over things. That’s what generates media, I guess, but you can never take away, really, what it’s all about, and that is celebrating sport excellence and inspiring the next generation of leaders in this country.

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. I’ve been hearing stuff—you know, you hear things, stuff going on. Do you believe that the criticism of the government and its management of the games file is kind of unpatriotic and that criticism hurts the morale of the athletes in any way? Do you think?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: No.

Mr. Paul Miller: Not really?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: No.

Mr. Paul Miller: No, I didn’t think so. When I coached hockey and baseball at high levels, they were about getting in shape. They were experienced. They don’t really bother with the politics or that stuff. They’re focused on what they’ve got to do. So I agree with that.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: That said, the government does hold us to a high level of accountability, and we hold them to a high level of accountability on our program. We’re kind of focused on what we deliver in terms of coach education and the agreement, so I think we’re—

Mr. Paul Miller: So if you’re holding them to a high level of accountability, I’d like to take a couple of lessons off you. That’d be good.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: We’re coaches.

Mr. Paul Miller: That’s good. For your athletes who compete at an elite level, what does security mean to them? We had those horror stories at the Munich Olympics and these kind of things. Security is an important part of feeling safe and secure in your environment. Like at Sochi—they were a little concerned about Sochi, not that that’s the same area that it could happen. But does that cross the athletes’ minds, or the coaches at all?

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: You know, every games that I’ve been at, the security has been extremely tight, and again, the media always makes things a lot more dramatic than they actually are. I was there in Atlanta when the bomb thing happened or whatever. We didn’t really feel anything, but people are calling you: “Are you okay?” I’m like, “What are you talking about?” So again, I think—

Mr. Paul Miller: They’re localized and smaller issues that become bigger issues.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Yes.

Mr. Paul Miller: Okay. How are you guys funded? Is it Own the Podium or Quest for Gold? Which one?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: We have two transfer payment agreements. One of them is program based and it’s for the delivery of the National Coaching Certification Program, which every province and territory has through an agreement. That provides just under $300,000 a year. We also have a separate transfer payment agreement, which is for Quest for Gold. That is a three-year agreement as well, and that’s just under $800,000. We run the program out of that.

Mr. Paul Miller: The program for coaches, depending on what discipline—obviously it varies. What certification are you required under what mandate, and who gives you the rubber stamp on whether you’re going to coach water polo or swimming or cycling? I know there’s programs—I coached hockey and I know we have level 1, 2, 3, and 4 for hockey. And when I refereed OMHA, we have levels of refereeing that we have to reach in your physical ability, and we get scouted by referees of higher level. They come to games and watch us perform, they grade us, they talk to us after the game—where you’re weak, where you weren’t. Do you do those kind of things too?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: The program that we have, the NCCP, has a program for 67 different sports. It really is up to the sports, whether it be the league, or the local club or the provincial sport organization that would actually dictate that mandatory requirement. We make that program available, and offer that program, but it is really up to the sport to dictate what they require before the coach goes onto the pool deck or the playing field. We’re delighted that soccer, the Ontario Soccer Association, is making mandatory the taking of a Make Ethical Decisions module. It’s a short module. Coaches really come together and are given a decision framework on decision-making, and I think it’s a good example moving forward. It is not mandatory across all sports in all settings.

Mr. Paul Miller: Who establishes the qualifications for coaches? And how do they move coaches through this system for the Pan/Parapan Games and the Olympics?

Ms. Susan Kitchen: That would be the Canadian Olympic Committee, which would designate in partnership with now the Coaching Association of Canada. They would certainly refer to credentials which are housed in a national database in Ottawa. That is a way to identify the credentials, that they’re the same and that they meet a high standard.

Mr. Paul Miller: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to thank the ladies for coming in. It’s great to see—I was a former coach—coaches get a little bit of the limelight. It’s nice, because you certainly work hard and help the kids. We really appreciate what you do, and I wish you all the best and all the success. I’m not quite sure why the government called you, but that’s interesting, so we’ll certainly look into that. Thanks.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Mr. Miller.

We’ll move to the 10-minute round of questioning and comments: Mr. Fraser from the government.

Mr. John Fraser: Thank you very much for coming in this afternoon, for your presentation and for your hard work.

I’d like to follow along the line of questioning of my colleague Mr. Miller. In terms of the investment in coaching in bringing the games here, how would you characterize how that investment has affected your field, in terms of raising its profile, increasing resources—

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Never enough. Sorry.

Mr. John Fraser: Never enough. Okay, we’ve heard that before.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Our funding has remained the same for a number of years, which is, I guess, a good thing that it has not been cut. So there’s a recognition that the value of what we do shouldn’t be cut, but, yes, we could certainly use more. I think that there is certainly leverage with the communities and perhaps some corporate doors that have been opened by the games and corporate consciousness, which I think will provide opportunities for us to expand our programs. So that’s a good thing.

Mr. John Fraser: And in terms of developing interest inside communities for coaching opportunities—because coaching is all about human development, really. When you look at that, whether it’s a five-year-old or a 50-year-old, it’s a field that basically helps people develop their full potential.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: I would agree.

Mr. John Fraser: You would agree. That’s all I wanted to say. Thank you very much.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you, Mr. Fraser. We’ll move to Mr. Jackson.

Mr. Rod Jackson: Thank you very much for coming. I really appreciate you taking the time. It was really interesting to hear what you do, and I wish you all the luck in the future.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. Mr. Miller.

Mr. Paul Miller: Go, coaches, go.

Ms. Susan Kitchen: Thank you.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Well, thank you very much again. You’ve been thanked on numerous occasions, but again, we really appreciate it. Keep up the good work. We need our coaches and you’re perfect examples of success. So thank you very much, and have a great afternoon.

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon: Thanks.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): This meeting is adjourned.

The committee adjourned at 1622.

CONTENTS

Monday 14 April 2014

Pan/Parapan American Games review G-639

Pan/Parapan American Games Secretariat G-639

Ms. Susan Capling

Coaches Association of Ontario G-651

Ms. Susan Kitchen

Ms. Sheilagh Croxon

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. Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury L)

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga–Streetsville L)

Mr. Rod Jackson (Barrie PC)

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa–Orléans L)

Mr. Paul Miller (Hamilton East–Stoney Creek / Hamilton-Est–Stoney Creek ND)

Also taking part / Autres participants et participantes

Mr. Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury L)

Clerk / Greffière

Ms. Sylwia Przezdziecki

Staff / Personnel

Ms. Anne Marzalik, research officer,
Research Services