Evidence of meeting #137 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was rfp.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Vice-President, Innovation, Sustainability and Prosperity, Waterfront Toronto
No, Mr. Chair, this was actually 159 days. The first phase of that submission was only the six weeks that was referred to, but the entire process was 159 days. That is a fact on our records. It's the second-longest RFP process that we have ever run as a corporation.
With regard to any element—
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Did you challenge the Auditor General on that? I mean, it's in all the papers. I just think that if the Auditor General doesn't know what she's talking about, you should have been correcting the record.
4:50 p.m.
Vice-President, Innovation, Sustainability and Prosperity, Waterfront Toronto
I wouldn't say the Auditor General does not know what she's talking about.
4:50 p.m.
Vice-President, Innovation, Sustainability and Prosperity, Waterfront Toronto
Yes. She and her staff were extraordinarily competent when they worked with Waterfront Toronto. We have no inkling of anything otherwise. But I also want to touch upon the preferential treatment component of it. The Auditor General pointed to a number of different pieces of information that we shared with a variety of different individuals, different companies, through the market sounding process. Sidewalk Labs was well into that market sounding process of the 50 plus companies that we spoke to. The information that she had pointed to were exhibits that were in the flood protection due diligence report, which was publicly available. There were publicly available websites, including links to the economic development site of the City of Toronto—
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Yes, you did give information to others, but she said you gave more and preferential treatment to them. That was what she said.
4:55 p.m.
Vice-President, Innovation, Sustainability and Prosperity, Waterfront Toronto
That was her interpretation.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
We're at time.
I believe there is one more question from Mr. Erskine-Smith.
Go ahead.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
We had Taylor Owen before us, talking about social media platforms and regulating social media platforms. He mentioned that the monetization model of personal information is one of the causes of some of the negative externalities we see with respect to social media and the massive collection of personal information. Now this, you've said, as I understand it, is not a traditional monetization model using personal information. That accords with what I've read in the documents.
So this isn't a traditional Alphabet/Google way of making money; they are a straight-up development company in this proposal?
4:55 p.m.
Vice-President, Innovation, Sustainability and Prosperity, Waterfront Toronto
I wouldn't say they're a straight-up development company. There are actually three approaches to revenue streams that they looked at early on. We're not sure where that will fit within their overall business proposal to us. There was the real estate component, an infrastructure component and then the intellectual property component. We don't know how that blends out and mixes out, but it isn't the traditional Google play.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Those are questions for them, not for you, though.
4:55 p.m.
Vice-President, Innovation, Sustainability and Prosperity, Waterfront Toronto
Right.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
I'm not sure if any colleagues of mine have additional questions, but that's all for me.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
I have one with Mr. Vaughan. That's not one speaking slot, that's one question. and one question for you, Charlie.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I guess that's the question I want to ask: Are we going for another full round? I'm happy not to go, but if we're going to continue with questions—
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
The understanding was that this would be the last. There's a target time we aim for on Thursdays.
Mr. Erskine-Smith, did you want to speak to that?
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
We can split it. So if Charlie wants to take a question—
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
One last five minutes: I think that's easy to manage.
Who would like to go first?
Mr. Vaughan, go ahead. The remainder of the time is four minutes, I believe.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Spadina—Fort York, ON
That's fine.
So consultation was actually done before the proposal was received.
4:55 p.m.
Chief Development Officer, Waterfront Toronto
That's correct. It's called market sounding and it's a very common practice.