►
From YouTube: Audit Committee - October 27, 2017 - Part 2 of 2
Description
Audit Committee, meeting 10, October 27, 2017 - Part 2 of 2
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=11952
Part 1 of 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Srj9iKQBwEw#t=3m38s
Meeting Navigation:
0:09:33 - Meeting resume
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
This
is
our
2018
operating
budget
with
me,
I
have
I,
know,
Jan
and,
and
she
leads
a
lot
of
the
financial
matters
from
within
our
office,
so
I'm
going
to
have
three
areas.
First,
a
little
bit
of
background
and
our
accomplishments
this
year
and
how
we
plan
to
move
forward
next
year
and
the
risks
were
facing.
D
This
slide
really
highlights.
It's
was
actually
prepared
by
Denny
dais
hotel,
these
comments,
and
it
reflects
that
City
Council
has
a
role
to
make
sure
that
the
right
controls
are
in
place
to
make
sure
public
funny
monies
are
managed
appropriately,
and
my
role
is
to
help
council
fulfill
their
role
by
auditing
when
the
programs
are
in
place
to
be
sure
that
they're,
a
balance
of
information
is
given
back
to
Council
we
perform,
we
perform
value-for-money
audits
and
value-for-money
audits
are
actually
another
way
of
saying
performance.
Audit
value-for-money
audit
is
an
old
term.
It's
a
term.
D
What
happens
is
as
soon
as
the
program
and
direction
is
in
place.
We
make
sure
it
performs
we
added
to
verify
that
it's
performing
as
intended.
So
we,
the
term
across
Auditor
General's
now
as
performance
audit,
is
what
we
use
and
our
role
is
to
make
sure
that
we
help
to
improve
practice.
So
really
we
are
your
independent
window
to
verify
what
you
say
should
be
done
is
actually
being
done.
D
If
we
do
some
work,
not
every
time
but
most
often
the
byproduct,
the
natural
byproduct
is
as
savings
and
what
we,
what
we
do
is
we
select
a
project
based
on
risk,
but
the
byproduct
is
savings,
and
so
they've
made
a
million
dollar
investment
and
we're
going
to
talk
about
how
well
that
was
used
this
year
and
this
last
year,
and
so
this
year,
we're
going
with
the
recommended
amount.
That
council
had
said
in
last
year's
motion,
and
that
was
another
temporary
increase
of
a
1.5
million
dollars
for
2018.
D
So
we're
just
going
with
that,
and
this
provides
you
with
a
highlight
of
the
amount
of
projects
we've
been
able
to
do
so
this
year.
Compared
to
last
year
we
had
18
performance
audits
and
we
have
78
million
in
new
real
life
savings,
and
then
we
have
61
million
in
potential
savings
realized
and
compared
to
a
lot
2016.
We
had
15,
and
so
you
can
see
that
with
more
investment,
so
we've
taken
it,
we've
used
it
appropriately
and
the
natural
byproduct
are
identified
efficiencies
for
the
city.
A
This
slide
summarizes
the
realized
and
potential
savings
resulting
from
our
audits
and
investigations.
So
what
you
see
on
the
blue
bars
is
the
hundred
and
sixty
million
dollars
in
one-time
and
projected
five-year
savings
that
we
had
reported
in
our
most
recent
annual
report
that
went
earlier
in
2017,
so
those
are
already
realized
savings
and
then
what
we
really
wanted
to
highlight
is
the
green,
the
green
bar
on
the
far
right,
that
is
approximately
78
million
dollars
from
one-time
and
projected
five
years,
cost
savings
that
were
realized
this
year.
A
So
these
savings
result
from
management's
implementation
of
recommendations
from
five
previously
issued
audit
reports
up
to
the
end
of
2015.
So,
for
example,
by
implementing
the
recommendations
from
a
2014
TTC
bus
warranty
audit,
the
city
will
achieve
37
million
dollars
in
cost
savings
over
five
years
by
changing
their
processes
to
identify
parts
under
bus
warranty
that
can
be
pursued
for
warranting
claims.
A
D
A
D
There
is
some
risk
with
that:
it's
it's
not
a
totally
safe
number.
There
is
some
risk,
but
what
we've
tried
to
be
is
always
conservative
and
we
seem
to
like
the
property
tax
actually
get
much
more
through
the
door,
so
we
estimated
about
4
million
on
property
tax
and
we
have
about
how
much
per
year,
four
five
every
year.
So
the
next
slide.
This
just
shows
that
for
every
dollar
invested
with
the
office,
the
return
and
the
2016
and
report
was
7.4
dollars.
D
The
return
for
2017
is
8.3
and
a
reminder
that
you
can't
always
predict
it
can
go
up
or
down,
but
we're
like
we
would
say
four
to
five
for
sure.
After
that
you
know
it's,
you
can
go
up
and
down
and
of
course,
there's
many
other
benefits
for
audits.
Sometimes
it
relates
to
administrative
fairness.
Sometimes
it
relates
to
customer
service.
Sometimes
it
relates
to
more
efficient
operations.
So,
overall
and
we've
have
some
accomplishments.
This
year
we
have
a
number
of
six.
D
Our
complaints
are
up
this
year
we
have
re-engineered
the
forensic
unit
and
we
have
three
or
four
additional
reports
from
that
unit.
We
coordinate
the
external
audits
so
we're
moving
along
for
sure,
and
this
is
our
budget
that
we're
our
budget
request,
which
is
a
1.5
million
increase
and
that's
based
on
what
council
recommended
last
year.
D
This
is
the
area
where
I
just
want
to
talk
about
the
risks
were
facing,
so
this
shows
people
who
were
new
to
the
rolls.
The
big
blue
block
represents
that
about
70
percent
of
the
people
and
the
offers
are
new
to
their
rolls.
And
then
we
have
people
who
are.
We
have
new
people
that
we've
been
able
to
hire
to
assist
with
their
audits
and
they're,
at
mainly
the
audit
analyst
level,
but
we
have
a
huge
it's
not
that
we're
turning
over.
It's
just
that
people
are
retiring
and
people
are
taking
new
positions.
D
So
that's
quite
a
big
amount
of
instability,
and
so
what
we're
doing
is
we're
leveraging
expertise
and
senior
advisers
to
bring
everybody
up
and
develop
so
that
when
I
leave
in
another
four
years,
the
office
will
be
very,
very
stable
and
renewed
and
by
level
and
by
bisection.
You
can
see
that
the
executive
is
all
new
to
their
roles.
Forensic
unit
is
mainly
new
to
their
roles.
We
have
seen
your
audit
managers
and
certainly
the
other
professional
staff.
That
would
be
our
audit
analysts
totally
new
to
their
role.
D
So
it's
going
to
be
very
critical
to
make
sure
that
we
have
enough
stability
in
our
budget
to
be
able
to
retain
the
temporary
staff
for
this
year,
not
at
least
so
that
we
can,
over
the
next
two
years,
be
able
to
get
that
investment
back
and
and
and
as
people
retire,
they'll
be
positioned
to
be
able
to
to
move
through,
and
this
is
our
organization.
It's
you
know
it's
in
your!
It's
in
your
it's
in
your
your
your
my
report,
and
it
just
shows
that
we
have.
D
You
know
three
senior
executive
+,
the
director
of
a
strategic
IT,
and
then
we
have
mainly
it
used
to
be
that
it
used
to
be
very
broad
at
the
top
and
now
we've
kind
of
made
it
more
of
a
pyramid
and
that's
the
amount
that
was
recommended
by
counsel.
So
to
recap,
we
have
taken
them
monies
that
we
were
provided
this
year.
D
We
have
invested
in
hiring
new
staff,
we
have
produced
by
engaging,
we
have
produced
by
engaging
in
spending
projects
and
making
new
projects
and
we're
positioned
to
be
able
to
continue
for
the
next
two
years.
So
any
questions,
oh
yes,
behind
every
other
journalist
is
an
amazing
staff
and
actually
I
just
want
to
recognize
my
entire
team.
E
It
says
indeed,
the
Auditor
General
could
be
of
great
assistance
to
counsel
by
bringing
forward
high-quality,
value-for-money
reports
and
studies
of
the
broader
and
very
fundamental
issues
that
the
city
has
to
resolve.
To
explain
to
us
lay
people.
What
is
the?
What
is
the
value
of
doing
the
value
for
money
reports
when
considering
you
know
major
and
major
investments.
D
E
E
I
was
a
kid
my
dad
would
often
say
you
know
if
you
want,
if
you
want
that
bike
I
want
you
to
go
to
three
or
four
other
shops,
first
to
compare
the
prices
and
understand
not
only
if
the
price
is
good,
but
also
like.
What's
the
quality
of
that
bike,
who
made
that
bike,
you
can
say
you
know,
is
that
the
right
bike
for
you
is
that
kind
of
you
know
a
fair.
You
know
metaphor:
we.
D
Do
that
from
a
certain
stage
it's
asked
after
the
direction
has
been
provided.
So
when
management
takes
it
away,
so
when
TT
come
teach
you
see
it
goes
away
or
when
MLS
goes
away
and
decides
to
buy
the
system
making
sure
that
happens.
That's
the
part
that
we
can
look
at
once.
It's
the
direction
has
been
provided
by
Council.
To
do
something
look
at
it
at
that's,
then
you
look.
E
D
E
D
D
E
So
like
what
would
you
what
would
you
say
if,
if
we
were
going
to
consider
like
a
major,
a
major
infrastructure
initiative
or
whatever
and
spend
billions
of
dollars
on
something
and
not
do
a
value
for
for
money
analysis?
What
would
that
be
responsible
or
would
you
would
you
advise
us
to
do
something
like
that?
Well,.
D
D
E
E
E
D
D
F
Thank
you,
sir.
Are
there
any
other
questions
from
the
committee
seeing
none
other
members
wishing
to
speak,
seeing
none
I
just
checked
in
the
disposition
of
this,
that
that
is
to
a
dog,
remember
care
to
put
forward
the
staff
recommendations
to
adopt
Custer
Carmichael
grab
all
those
in
favor
that
is
carried.
E
You
mr.
chair,
if
the
clerk's
could
post
my
motion
in
light
of
what
we
heard
just
a
moment
ago
from
the
Auditor
General,
I
would
hope
that
you
would
support
her
advice,
which
is
always
to
make
an
informed
decision
and
so
on
on
on.
What's
before
counsel,
just
read
it
out
that
the
Audit
Committee
recommend
that
City
Council
amend
the
Auditor
General's
work
plan
to
include
a
value
for
money.
E
Audit,
comparing
the
one-stop
Scarborough
subway
extension
to
the
seven
stops
car,
LRT
and
report
to
the
Audit
Committee
in
the
second
quarter
of
2018
this
value
for
money.
A
report
has
never
been
done.
This
comparison
has
never
been
this
comparative
analysis.
Information
has
never
once
been
provided
to
City,
Council
and
I
would
submit
to
you
that,
whether
you
want
a
subway
or
an
LRT
or
any
other
type
of
technology,
that's
not
the
question,
and
that's
not
the
big
debate
before
us
today.
E
My
question
for
you
is:
do
you
want
to
have
all
the
relevant
facts
before
you
to
inform
your
decision?
That's
the
only
question
and
you
have
to
answer
that.
I
would
also
submit
to
you
that
there's
nowhere
in
Toronto
that
this
question
is
better
posed
than
at
the
audit
committee
itself.
Our
job
and
our
responsibility
is
to
seek
this
information
and
in
fact
I
would
pose
this.
E
If,
if
you
would
have
preferred
to
have
the
7
stop
LRT
and
this
information
will
come
back
and
support
that
arguments
well,
then
of
course
you'll
be
demonstrated,
correct
and
then
hopefully,
counsel
would
would
recognize
that
I
would
also
say
in
the
same
light,
in
the
same
way
that
if
you
would
prefer
the
one-stop
subway
that
if
the
information
comes
back
to
support
that
argument
and
in
fact,
if
you've
always
believed
it
would,
then
what
do
you
have
to
be
afraid
of.
You
should
have
nothing
to
be
afraid
of.
E
In
fact
you
should
be
you
should
you
should
want
that
information
to
be
able
to
hold
up
high
and
demonstrate
that
you
were
right
all
along.
So
I
asked
my
colleagues
to
support
this
request.
As
we
just
heard
from
the
Auditor
General,
we've
asked
for
a
value-for-money
report
on
much
smaller
things,
which
cost
far
less
money.
E
The
Auditor
General
just
told
us
that
her
office
has
been
able
to
identify
40
million
dollars
in
savings
for
the
Dec.
What
why
wouldn't
we
want
to
find
a
billion
dollars
or
more
in
her
report
or
her
presentation
to
us
and
I'm
gonna?
Read
it
again,
auntie
indeed,
the
Auditor
General
could
be
a
great
assistance
to
counsel
by
bringing
forward
high-quality,
value-for-money
reports.
C
You
you're
saying
that
you
want
to
report,
but
the
project's
not
done
yet.
It's
are
going
to
be
evaluating.
All
you're
doing
is
evaluating
the
plans,
the
proposals
right
so
even
at
that
is
the
guesstimate,
because
we're
right
now
the
only
plan
that
is
in
place
is
an
order
of
magnitude
estimates
at
five
percent,
not
even
at
30
percent,
yet
all
right.
So
why
would
you
ask
for
such
a
report?
C
E
So
what
what
we
have
in
front
of
us
is
I
mean
the
latest.
For
example,
the
latest
cost
estimation
for
the
seventh
stop.
Our
T
was
one
point.
Four,
eight
billion
dollars
versus
three
point:
three
billion
dollars
for
a
one
stop
subway.
What
we
do
know
is
that
the
seven
stations
would
have
been
along
their
own
corridor.
They
would
have
provided
far
more
service,
far
far
less
time
for
scarborough's
events
to
be
on
the
bus
would
have
connected
to
more
educational
institutions,
more
priority,
neighborhoods,
etc.
E
Then
one
single
subway
stop
that
would
have
actually
had
far
more
Scarborough
zidon
sway
ting
on
the
bus
for
far
longer
to
be
able
to
go
anywhere,
or
at
least
many
places
it
would
have
served
far
fewer
people
and
it
would
have
cost
a
lot
more
money.
In
fact,
what
we
do
know
is
that
the
seven
stop
our
T
was
funded
by
the
province
and
now
we've
actually
increased
our
not
only
our
debt
load
but
residents
property
taxes
to
be
able
to
put
the
city
share
towards
the
ones
top
subway.
E
So
based
on
what
we
do
know
I
think
there
are
reasonable
questions
about
the
value
for
money
that
we're
getting
for
the
ones
top
subway
and
I.
I
know
you
as
a
thoughtful
councillor
would
want
to
have
this
analysis
done
by
an
independent
objective
party,
like
the
Auditor
General,
to
be
able
to
inform
your
decision
as
do
I.
G
I'ma
show
you
more
question
to
mover
on
the
item
so
so
I
respect
where
you're
coming
from
cows
from
out
low
and
and
your
stance
on
this.
But
having
said
that,
I
I
have
had
the
privilege
of
being
part
of
counsel
during
one
of
these.
Many
debates
on
the
subway
verse,
LRT
topic.
I,
do
recall
many
of
councillors.
Actually
myself
asking
staff
when
these
debates
were
happening
about
value
for
money
and
they
they
have
from
what
I've
recalled
shown
the
value
for
money
in
their
presentations.
E
I'm
with
other
respect,
I'm
questioning
your
recollection
because
while
there
may
have
been
I
mean
I
I,
fully
trust
you
that
you
would
have
had
maybe
informal
or
offline
discussions
or
what
have
you
and
I
by
the
way.
I
respect
you
for
doing
so.
You
should
be
asking
those
questions
so
there's
those
are
the
right
questions
to
be
asking
the
only
track
record
of
actually
any
formal
request
of
of
counsel,
asking
staff
to
do
a
value-for-money
assessment
of
this
has
been
through
emotions
that
I've,
moved
and
they've
been
rejected
by
counsel.
E
So
I
can
just
tell
you
that
that
factually,
when
counsel
has
had
the
opportunity
to
request
the
most
basic
and
relevant
and
pertinent
information
to
make
just
just
a
an
informed
decision,
not
not
leading
or
Swain
one
way
or
another,
but
just
to
have
that
information
in
front
of
them.
They
actually
opted
to
say
no,
but
I
have
more.
You
know
I've
confidence
in
this
committee,
because
this
committee,
what
this
committee
does,
is
that
it
it.
E
It
reviews
the
audits
that
are
performed
and
it
requests
that
the
auditor-general
through
counsel
in
this
case,
make
those
requests-
and
I
know
you-
and
I
know
all
of
my
colleagues
on
this
committee-
to
be
the
kind
of
people
who
want
to
have
relevant
information
before
making
a
decision
and
the
fact
that
this
was
never
done
on,
arguably
be
one
of
the
biggest
expenditures
ever
ever
done
by
counsel.
That's
going
to
affect
so
many
tens
of
thousands
of
people's
lives
for
generations
to
come.
E
That
will
either
enable
or
handicap
our
ability
to
be
able
to
provide
an
invest
in
capital,
infrastructure,
transit
infrastructure
for
so
many
people
for
years
to
come.
Wouldn't
you
want
to
know
the
same
kind
of
information
that
we
do
for
all
sorts
of
things
like
MOS
and
various
things
that
we
do
randomly
all
the
time
I
just
I
can't
imagine
any
thoughtful
responsible
person
wouldn't
wouldn't
want
to
do
that.
The
only
the
only
thing
that
could
get
in
your
way
and
I
say
this
respectfully,
but
I
just
know
that
this
environment
creates
this.
E
H
F
H
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I
would
urge
my
colleagues
not
to
support
this
recommendation.
This
is
yet
just
another
back
door
attempt
to
sabotage
a
plan
that
the
councillor
has
fought
against
over
and
over
and
over
again.
I
would
remind
my
colleagues
that
in
May
9th
2013
our
council
with
many
members
here,
not
everybody
was
here.
The
vote
was
35
to
9
in
favor
of
the
Scarborough
subway.
Let
me
say
that
again
the
vote
in
favor
of
the
subway
35
in
favor
5
opposed.
Since
then,
we've
had
a
total
of
nine
votes
on
the
Scarborough
subway.
H
We
have
one
every
single
one
of
those
votes
nine
times
over
I
respect,
counselor,
Matt
Lauer's
privileged
to
be
opposed
and
to
be
in
the
minority.
On
this
issue,
that's
acceptable!
That's
why
we
have
democratic
debate
and
that's
why
we
have
votes.
But
when
you
lose
nine
votes
in
a
row,
I
believe
it's
an
abuse
of
process
to
come
to
the
audit
committee
and
to
say
well,
I
can't
win
this
any
other
way,
so
I'm
going
to
try
to
throw
something
else
at
this
and
hope
it
sticks
to
the
wall.
H
But
we've
had
and
I
refer
you
to
July
2013
staff
reports,
October
13
staff
reports,
where
we
have
charge
line
by
line
Garrison's
of
subway
versus
LRT.
Our
council
has
overwhelmingly
chosen
a
very
simple
technology.
L
our
T's
are
good.
Busses
are
good.
Subway's
are
good,
they're
all
tools
in
the
toolbox
to
help
us
to
get
it
to
move
around
the
city.
This
council
has
made
a
very
determined,
very
thoughtful,
very
thorough
decision
to
go
with
a
subway
in
Scarborough
nine
times.
H
We've
done
that
to
come
back
now
and
say
well,
I
want
an
audit
on
the
subway,
not
on
the
old
LRT
plan.
I
cannot
remember
this
councillor
in
any
time
when
the
LRT
was
on
the
books,
so
coming
forward
to
saying
I
want
a
money
for
value
audit
on
the
LRT
plan
because
he
agreed
with
it.
But
now
the
council
has
chosen
something
that
he
doesn't
choose.
He
is
here
with
emotion.
That
again,
I
believe
has
no
merit.
H
Is
an
abuse
of
process
is
not
on
point
and
is
just
another
way
to
try
to
reopen
a
debate.
The
council
has
decided
nine
times.
In
fact,
even
just
now,
the
councillor
mentions
the
cost
of
the
LRT.
We
have
a
very
thorough
Auditor
General's
report-
that's
before
us
today
that
actually
states
very
clearly
in
the
report
that
the
cost
of
the
LRT,
the
briefing
note
that
CEO
Andy
Byford
and
his
professional
staff
put
forward.
H
Not
the
mayor,
not
councillor,
mat
Lau,
not
myself,
but
the
professional
staff
who
are
in
charge
of
the
subway
project
and
the
LRT
project.
They
put
a
cost
forward
and
said
the
project.
When
you
add
up
the
costs
of
the
proposed
LRT
is
two
point:
nine
eight
billion
dollars.
That's
the
cost
that
staff
put
forward.
H
That's
the
cost
that
the
Auditor
General
has
confirmed
so
I,
don't
think
we
should
be
going
back
and
listening
to
people
who
want
to
read
about
the
bate
that
they've
lost
nine
times
to
try
to
desperately
find
something
that
will
sabotage
the
project.
I
see
this
motion
as
an
attempt
to
sabotage
a
project
that
the
people
of
Scarborough
have
fought
for
for
a
very
long
time
and
while
councillor
Motlow
is
free
to
fight
for
a
subway
for
his
residence
I,
don't
think
he
should
be
free
to
stop
a
subway
to
Scarborough
residents.
H
Just
months
before
we
open
a
subway
to
York
University,
York,
University
and
Jane,
and
steals
this
Christmas
all
those
who
want
to
get
up
to
university
or
not
all,
but
many
many
people
will
be
taking
a
subway
up
to
Jane
and
Steel's,
and
that's
a
good
thing
and
that's
part
of
city
building,
so
I
would
say
as
the
mayor's
a
lead
on
the
Scarborough
subway
we've
debated
this
nine
times
already.
The
votes
have
been
overwhelming.
Every
time.
H
I
would
hope
that
councillor
mal
would
respect
the
will
of
the
majority
and
a
democratic
arena
and
accept
the
verdict.
That's
been
delivered
nine
times
over
that
we're
moving
full
steam
ahead
with
the
Scarborough
subway,
as
supported
by
her
federal
and
provincial
colleagues
as
voted
by
Council.
To
do
tax
increases
to
do
that
so
to
try
to
go
backwards.
Now
is
an
abuse
of
process,
and
I
would
suggest
that
this
committee
reject
that
abusive
process
when.
E
A
privilege,
mr.
chair
point
of
privilege,
come
I,
didn't
want
to
interrupt
councillor.
Tver
makers,
so
I
hold
the
point
of
privilege
until
after
he
concluded
his
remarks,
but
there
are
two
things
that
I'm
not
gonna.
Ask
him
to
withdraw
something,
but
I
think
it's
just
important
to
correct
two
things
that
that
directly
affect
comments
around
my
motivation.
I
was
very
clear.
E
All
of
you
were
here
just
five
minutes
ago,
when
I
made
it
explicitly
clear
that
I'm
not
getting
into
a
debate
over
whether
or
not
we're
gonna,
what
which
one
we're
gonna
do
I
would
expect.
Actually,
if
we
did
go
ahead
with
the
one-stop
subway
that
you
as
responsible
councillors
would
want
to
know,
the
truth
would
want
to
know
actually
was
a
good
use
of
money
or
mr.
chair.
This
is
spam.
So
councillor.
E
The
other
and
the
other-
and
the
other
point
is
that
he
just
incorrectly
told
you
that
the
auditor-general
port,
that
you're
about
to
review
in
a
moment
confirmed
the
the
price
tag
that
he
just
said.
In
fact,
she
found
over
six
hundred
million
dollars
of
errors.
In
their
brief,
you
note
that
just
factually
was
untrue
and
what
I'm
sick
of
is
just
the
this.
This
misleading
all
this
misinformation
that
comes
out
that
sways
our
debates.
What
I'm
asking
for
counselor
but
the
fact.
C
Motion
and
I
spoke
about
the
origin
or
did
report
in
other
item
that
the
estimates
that
were
provided
by
TTC
askin
Florida
Bay
Mecca
was
saying
that
really
mayor,
deep
America
saying
that
it's
a
reasonable
estimate.
It's
between
reason,
that's
why
I
asked
whether
he
has
he
knows
anything
about
project
planning
and
at
that
order,
a
magnitude
estimate.
It
is
the
you
use
tables
that
you
say
or
a
kilometer
of
subway.
C
This
buildup
of
kilometer
of
LRT
is
built,
and
then
you
factor
it
up
to
when
is
gonna,
be
built
for
inflation
and
for
extra
cost
of
building
over
the
years,
because
it
doesn't
increase
so
I.
Remember.
Reading
2%
and
4%
increases
in
her
report.
So
to
do
another
one,
it's
not
going
to
be
useful,
so
I
would
not
be
supporting
that
motion.
Thank
you.
Thank.
F
You
councillor
Lee
there
any
other
members
wishing
to
speak.
All
right,
I
will
make
a
brief
statement.
I
appreciate
the
importance
of
the
motion
that
councillor
not
law
has
put
forward.
It
is
asking
the
City
Council
amend
the
audit
plan
of
the
Auditor
General,
something
that
is
not
done
lightly
for
council
to
essentially
direct
the
auditor
to
do
something
but
I'm
going
to
read
a
paragraph
of
another
report
of
another
item
on
today's
agenda
and
it's
it's
extremely
important.
I
think
that
it
be
mentioned.
It's
point
number
eight.
F
On
page
4,
it
says
it
is
not
the
Auditor
General's
role
to
question
the
policy
decisions
of
elected
officials,
nor
is
it
the
Auditor
General's
role
to
reopen
City
Council
decisions.
Therefore,
the
Auditor
General
did
not
investigate
items
two
and
three
and
paragraph
six
in
relation
to
the
complainants
concern
that
a
further
business
case
was
needed.
After
considering
all
of
the
information
that
had
come
before
it,
council
decided
a
further
business
case
study
to
compare
the
SS
II
and
the
S
LRT
was
not
needed.
F
Counsels
decision
will
not
be
reopened
by
the
Auditor
General
and
very
specifically,
I
believe.
It
was
point
number
three
to
investigate
whether
the
sse
will
achieve
value
for
money.
The
reason
I
bring
this
up
is
not
is
not
to
open
up
this
other
report,
we'll
get
to
that.
It's
my
concern
over
this
motion
will
place
the
Auditor
General
in
a
very
difficult
position.
F
F
F
F
B
He
thought
that
the
fact
that
the
Auditor
General's
report
found
no
interference
on
the
part
of
the
the
politicians
and
the
TTC
that
was
that
was
finds.
He
accepted
those
conclusions,
but
he's
disappointed
that
there
was
no
value
for
money
analysis
carried
out
by
the
Auditor
General.
This
was
something
that
was
part
of
the
complaint
and
the
Auditor
General's
has
said
in
her
report
that
she
may
carry
out
an
audit
of
the
scar,
subway
and
normally.
B
What
we
have
seen
in
the
past
with
transit
projects
is
that
they
are
compared
to
other
transit
in
the
city
existing.
So,
for
example,
if
you
wanted
to
build
an
LRT
along
Eglinton
East,
you
would
have
to
compare
it
to
existing
bus
service.
It
seems
to
have
been
a
regular
part
of
the
transit
planning
process
in
this
city.
For
many
many
years
it
was
done
with
a
Scarborough
LRT.
The
Scarborough
LRT
was
compared
with
the
Scarborough
RT,
that's
how
it
was
done
all
of
a
sudden.
B
Now
we
get
to
a
subway
we're
not
doing
it
that
way
anymore
and
we're
being
told
that
we're
trying
to
sabotage
all
we
really
want
to
do
is
know
the
facts.
We
want
you
to
know
the
facts.
We
want
everybody
to
know
the
facts.
We
think
it's
prudent
and
we're
really
confused
and
disappointed
as
to
why
it's
not
happening,
and
why
anytime
ask
for
one
there.
Suddenly,
you
know
the
door
shut.
B
B
He
also
took
took
part
in
these
public
consultations,
but
it
looks
like
anything
that
was
done
at
that
level.
As
far
as
meeting
the
official
plan
priorities
as
far
as
social
equity
was
kind
of
thrown
out
the
window
when
it
came
to
the
subway-
and
he
says
you
know-
we're
set
to
spend
billions
of
dollars
on
this
scarborough
holy
grail,
we're
doing
an
entire
bus
network.
So
now,
not
only
are
we
gonna
have
this
subway,
but
we're
going
to
redo
our
whole
bus
network.
B
All
these
buses
are
gonna
have
to
be
rerouted
in
Scarborough,
because
they
will
only
have
one
place
to
go
other
than
Kennedy
station,
and
we
still
don't
know
if
the
Scarborough
subway
has
value
for
money.
Is
it
going
to
do
what
we
need
it
to
do?
Is
it
going
to
serve
the
trans
rider
transit
riders
in
Scarborough?
Is
it
going
to
improve
their
ability
to
get
around
Scarborough?
We
still
don't
know
we
might
be
better
off
just
taking
the
buses
that
were
on
right
now.
B
So
please
don't
let
down
transit
riders
we're
not
trying
to
sabotage
anything
we're
trying
to
get
decent
transit
for
Scarborough
transit
riders,
and
we
think
all
of
you
need
to
know
the
facts
and,
however,
you
vote.
We
can't
control
that,
but
you
need
to
know
whether
or
not
what
you're
doing
when
you're
spending
that
much
money,
whether
it
has
value
for
money
or
not,
and
then
with
your
eyes
open.
B
B
What
I
know
this
is
all
kind
of
a
farce,
so
I
want
to
thank
Josh
for
putting
an
effort
in
and
putting
an
important
motion
asking
you
here
to
actually
vote
for
value
for
money
to
look
at
billions
of
dollars,
but
you
are
putting
showing
that
you
don't
care
about
billions
of
dollars
that
it
is
a
farce.
This
is
theater,
I
mean
josh
is
out
voted
because
they're,
mostly
at
Pro
Subway
people
here
on
the
council
on
this
committee.
This
isn't
so
you're
showing
here
the
audit
committee.
B
You
were
as
a
citizen
of
this
city
ongoing
the
people
in
the
audit
committee
are
not
interested
in
value
for
money,
it
doesn't
seem.
The
mayor
is
interested
in
value
for
money
and
and
the
Auditor
General
doesn't
seem
interested
in
the
value
for
money,
and
it
reminds
me
of
a
play
by
a
UNESCO
he's,
an
Italian
playwright
and
it's
the
same
thing.
He
talks
about
the
absurdity
in
in
clinical
situations.
B
That's
exactly
it
we'll
look
at
this
in
20
years,
when,
with
the
the
costs
were
sunk
in
debt
in
interest
payments,
we
don't
have
money
for
everything
we'll
have
to
have
privatized
everything.
Look
at
this
this
what's
happening
here
now,
we've
discovered
a
subway,
and
we
can
say
this
is
where
it
started.
This
is
where
we
started
to
not
have
money
for
anything
in
this
city,
and
you
are
all
responsible.
B
Everybody
who
votes
for
the
subway
and
votes
for
against
motions
to
look
at
value
for
money
and
others
general
who
refuse
to
do
that
as
well,
are
part
of
the
problem
and
you've
got
gonna,
have
a
lot
to
to
say
to
gonna
be
answering
to
people
in
this
city.
It's
disgusting.
Quite
frankly,
it's
a
strong
word
and
just
like
Josh
said
we're
sick
of
misleading
information.
They've
used
just
two
to
four
it:
a
political
agenda,
its
agenda,
not
for
what's
best
for
the
city,
people
and
you're,
not
even
looking
right.
F
H
B
I
I
mentioned
this
before
being
here
that
deputation
defined
in
the
canadian
oxford
dictionaries,
basically
appointing
people
to
represent
others
so
before
I
run
out
of
time.
I
just
want
to
make
this
clear
that
I'm
making
an
actual
deputation
and
that
I'm
appointing
the
Auditor
General
Beverly
Romeo
Bueller
there
and
her
crack
team
to
to
do
a
value-for-money
study
on
this
LRT
versus
Scarborough
and
I
respectfully
direct
her
to
do
it.
I
So
in
this
report
it
says
the
value
for
money,
performance,
audit,
to
examine
management
practices,
controls
and
reporting
systems
to
achieve
councils
direction
in
a
cost-effective
manner,
is
within
the
purview
of
the
Auditor
General
and
may
form
part
of
a
future
audit.
Hopefully,
I
did
something
to
help
with
that.
It
also
says
it
is
not
the
Auditor
General's
role
to
question
the
policy
decisions
of
elected
officials,
nor
is
it
the
Auditor
General's
role
to
reopen
count,
City
Council
decisions.
Now
we
just
heard
from
counsel
to
make
de
beer
maker
hear
about
council
decisions.
Council
votes.
I
You
know
the
results
of
that,
but
let's
take
a
look
at
how
some
of
these
council
votes
have
been
decided
in
the
past.
This
is
an
article
from
Jennifer
pagli,
arrow
March,
19
2017,
you
can
see
here.
This
is
meritorious,
is
a
councillor
wong-tam
Mayor,
John
Tory
supported
gender
equality
motion
office
lobbied
against
it.
A
budget
vote
in
February
sought
Tory
voting
in
favor
of
emotions,
supporting
gender
equality
and
budgeting.
I
While
a
cheat
sheet
from
his
office
encouraged
Isle,
allied
councillors
to
vote
against
it
whipping
the
vote
is
not
democracy
as
councillor
to
bear
maker
mentioned
earlier
whipping
the
vote.
That's
a
rigged
system
has
nothing
to
do
with
democracy,
so
I
here's
something
I
put
together
here.
This
is
Kessler
Grimes
and
see
manager,
Peter
walls,
Peter
Wallace
is
saying
to
councillor
Grimes.
I
If
the
direction
to
city
staff
were
to
undertake
a
apples
to
apples,
comparison
of
an
LRT
versus
a
subway
and
the
councillor
Graham
says,
but
would
you
need
direction
from
Council
to
do
that?
Correct,
Peter
wall
says,
council
has
never
asked
us
for
that
direct
comparison,
so
we
would
obviously
need
direction
from
Council
in
order
to
undertake
that
this
is
a
significant
investment
of
our
money.
He
doesn't
say
that
about
I'm,
saying
that
you
may
wish
to.
You
may
wish
to
direct
us
to
undertake
such
an
investigation,
but
you
have
not
to
this
point.
I
This
one
is
former
planner
Jennifer
Keyes
mutton,
councillor,
Matt,
Lowe,
Jennifer,
Keyes
Matt
says
the
councillor
Matt
Lauer.
The
LRT
option
in
fact
is
more
desirable.
Councillor
Matt
Lauer
responds
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
my
colleagues
heard
that
so
you're
saying,
based
on
all
the
evidence,
based
criteria
that
you're
using
the
LRT
for
this
specific
route
is
the
preferred
option
for
Scarborough
and
Toronto
Jennifer
Keyes
Matt's
responses,
that's
correct!
I
This
is
again
Mara
Tory
and
councillor
Matt
Lauer,
councillor,
Matt
law
says
that's
not
what
you
said
to
Matt.
You
were
using
as
an
argument.
You
were
suggesting
that
it
was
a
fact
Mara
Tory
says
well
for
those
people,
it
is
a
fact.
Councillor.
Matt
Lauer
responds
to
those
people.
It
is
a
belief
based
on
a
subway
that
has
not
been
built.
It's
not
a
fact.
Just
because
you
say
it's
a
fact.
Facts
are
subjective.
This
is
an
article
from
the
Toronto
Star,
where
it's
mentioned
here.
I
We're
trustees
of
the
public's
money,
and
that
was
meritorious
ed-
that
told
reporters
at
City
Hall
on
Wednesday.
This
is
a
tweet
where
Matt
Galloway
says
among
interesting
things
here.
The
spokesperson
for
community
group
act
connects
Scarborough.
TÃo
is
a
lobbyist
for
owner
of
Scarborough
town
centre.
Now
here's
the
best
part.
This
is
a
tweet
from
councillor
my
Clayton.
There
are
backroom
politics
at
play
here
that
may
begin
to
see
light
after
flagrant
attempts
to
astroturf
are
exposed
huge
dollars
for
some
I
read
that
and
I
think
Wow
like
it.
I
That
sounds
like
there's
something
almost
criminal
going
on
behind
the
closed
doors
that
maybe
the
police
should
investigate
and
something
that
rosemary,
fried
managed
to
get
out
of
meritorious
one
of
these
past
meetings,
meritorious
response
was
well.
I
may
have
shook
somebody's
hand
in
the
past
yeah
and
then
merit
or
email
on
somebody's
t-shirt
and
then
merit
or
email
held
up.
F
H
F
D
D
D
The
part
of
your
general
matter,
general
for
Canada,
who
wrote
the
notes
that
I
quoted
in
my
slide
earlier
said
that
was
Danny
days
Hotel.
It's
only
after
you've
decided
the
policy,
the
elected
officials
who
reign
supreme,
decide
the
policy
and
really
after
the
funding
government
funding
is
received.
It
is
only
then
that
it
reaches
a
stage
that
auditors
can
then
engage
and
they
can
see
how
well
the
program
is
being
implemented.
D
It's
generally
understood
that
it's
at
the
implementation
stage,
it's
important
not
to
question
government
policy,
so
there's
a
lot
of
information
that
has
happened.
That
won't
be
part
of
my
presentation.
A
lot
of
discussion.
A
lot
of
presentations
deputations
there
has
been
consultations
with
the
public
that
has
happened
at
Council,
and
that
is
where
the
question
lies
as
soon
as
Council
gives
the
direction
to
move
ahead
is
my
role,
then,
to
make
sure
your
direction
is
implemented
in
a
cost-effective
manner.
D
The
reason
this
project
is
a
little
bit
different
is
that
when
we
receive
an
allegation,
as
we
did,
that
a
member
of
staff
had
manipulated
information
and
misled
council,
it
could
lead
Council
to
make
a
decision
that
wouldn't
be
the
appropriate
decision.
So
it
was
incumbent
upon
me
then
to
evaluate
whether
actually
the
information
was
deliberately
erroneous,
as
it
was
alleged
whether
the
council
was
being
deliberately
missed.
So
when
I
started
this
project,
you
know
when
we
start
any
project.
D
An
auditor
starts
with
and
no
matter
how
long
you've
known
somebody
and
if
I
only
have
don't
didn't
know.
Mr.
Byford
I
only
audited
him
in
the
audits.
Weren't
all
go
they're,
actually
quite
quite
hard
audits,
but
I.
Never
think
that
somebody
is.
If
this
allegation
is
true
or
not
true,
you
keep
a
professional
skepticism
at
all
times
you,
you
never
know
where
an
investigation
is
going
to
take.
D
You
and
I
also
recognize
a
counselor
Matt,
while
you're
on
my
Audit
Committee
and
you
supporter
of
audit
and
and
there
had
been
some
back-and-forth
in
October
and
in
the
press
related
to-
and
you
know
it
counts
from
at
low
discussion
about
this
matter
and
I
thought
if
it
turned
out
at
the
end
that
the
allegations
were
supported.
I
was
concerned
that
maybe
somebody
might
say
that
I
was
playing
a
favor
and
we
have
to
operate
with
neither
fear
nor
favor.
D
So
what
I
did
was
I
hired
a
key
investigator
so
Ken
phrase
here
he
is
a
senior
director
of
phrase
associates,
so
his
firm
followed
the
money
in
the
MFE
inquiry.
His
firm
would
be
the
firm
I
wanted
to
lead
this
investigation
to
add
another
layer
of
Independence
thinking,
I
didn't
know
if
it's
going
to
come
out
in
a
in
to
favor
one
side
or
the
other
and
understanding
was
a
political
debate
and
I
had
to
be
absolutely
have
another
layer
of
Independence.
D
First
in
my
very
first
meeting
with
the
complainants,
I
said
that
this
issue
would
probably
be
a
public
report
and
the
reason
for
that
is
if
it
turned
out
to
be
true,
the
public
needed
to
know
and
if
it
turned
out
that
it
wasn't
true,
allegations
were
serious
and
were
made
and
how
to
make
sure
that
that
that
the
the
the
facts
were
known.
So
that's
the
background
to
this
audit
to
this
investigation.
D
D
I'll
go
very
quickly
to
we
were
asked
to.
First
of
all,
the
ombudsman
was
asked
to
look
at
a
briefing
note
and
then
I
subsequently
received
and
about
a
10-page
complaint
and
there's
many
many
things
in
there
and
essentially
what
the
team
distilled
was
that
there
were.
There
was
an
allegation,
that
of
political
interference
that
has
led
to
misinformation
and
we've
not
only
looked
at
the
briefing
note,
but
we
also
looked
at
other
things
like
when,
when
it
was
brought
out
that
Miz
Keyes
Matt
maybe
didn't
agree
with
the
numbers.
D
At
one
point
in
time
we
outlined
in
our
report
based
on
our
interviews
with
her,
based
on
the
all
of
the
information
we
collected,
and
we
verified
with
her
that
our
understanding
of
what
happened
here
was
correct
and,
and
it
could
have
been,
it
wasn't
correct.
She
could
have
you
know
said
something
else,
but
she
is
verified.
So
we've
gone
through
every
aspect,
and
what
we
have
found
is
that
mr.
Byford,
the
CEO
didn't
mislead,
counsel
intentionally
mislead
counsel.
The
briefing
out
was
prepared.
D
There
was,
there
is
a
range
in
there
and
there
were
certain
things
that
weren't
consider
that
could
have
been
considered
and
but
it's
still
within
range
in
relation
to
the
stage
of
the
project.
It's
very
very
early
and
and
those
numbers
are
going
to
continue
to
fluctuate.
But
that's
the
nature
of
a
big
project
like
this
and
and
and
the
third
thing
is
that
the
briefing
note
was
disseminated
in
an
uneven
fashion,
and
that
is
an
opportunity
to
move
forward
and
to
ensure
that
full
information
is
at
the
table.
D
D
So
we've
we've
made
a
recommendation,
and
the
clerk
supports
the
recommendation
that
we
made
to
make
sure
it's
very
clear
how
how
information
like
this
can
be
distributed,
because
I
do
feel
that
if
it
was
distributed
in
a
different
fashion,
it
would
have
been
it
would
have
taken
away
some
of
the
concern.
So
it's
not
a
problem
to
request
a
briefing
note,
but
and
and
but
making
sure
the
dissipation
is
appropriate
as
fair.
H
You
mr.
chair
got
you
and
through
you
mr.
chair
to
our
staff,
I
guess:
I'll
start
at
the
beginning,
because
I
think
I,
like
you,
listen
to
some
of
the
accusations
and
I
found
him
actually
be
very
serious
that
our.
If
would
you
agree
with
me
that
some
of
the
accusations
seem
to
imply
that
some
city
staff
members
purposely
misled
council
through.
H
I
got
a
quote
here
and
I
can't
remember
from
which
part
of
the
report,
but
I
think
there
was
I'll,
call
it
an
accusation
or
a
claim.
Maybe
a
claim
is
a
better
word,
a
claim
that
there
was
political
interference
by
elected
officials
in
the
creation
of
that
briefing
note,
did
you
find
that
there
was
political
interference
or
no
political
interference?
We.
D
H
H
H
At
finding
number
or
paragraph
number
97
of
your
report,
the
accusations
that
the
mayor
somehow
created
this
briefing
report
or
inappropriately
asked
for
this
report,
I
found
out
for
the
first
time
when
I
read
your
report,
because
I
didn't
know
this
until
I
read
your
your
report
was
that
mr.
Thompson
says
was
on
vacation,
etc.
He
advised
us
that,
on
his
return
to
work
on
June
27th,
he
reviewed
the
contents
of
the
briefing
note
and
proposed,
including
the
cost
escalation,
to
allow
a
more
consistent
comparison
of
its
project
costs
to
the
Scarborough
subway
extension.
H
D
You
a
through
chair,
it
came
from
different
staff.
I
know
that
the
DCM
was
interested
as
far
as
having
a
comparison,
the
chief
of
staff
of
of
TTC
Thompson,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
think
our
question
was:
why
wasn't
that
done
before?
Because
having
having
a
an
apples
to
apples,
comparison
of
today's
costs
would
have
been
appropriate
and
staff
would
have
been
the
right
thing
for
staff
to
have
provided
so
I
think
that
was
probably
our
one
of
our
questions
and.
C
Just
to
expand
a
bit
Rick
Thompson
was
the
one.
There
was
a
briefing
note
prepared
that
was
always
subject
to
his
review
when
he
came
back
and
when
he
did
review
it,
he
thought
having
the
numbers
in
there
made
sense
and
he's
the
one
who
put
the
numbers
in.
So
the
numbers
came
the
last
minute
on
the
27th.
H
So,
as
the
senior
project
lead
on
the
subway,
he
felt
it
important
to
actually
to
be
professional
to
compare
I'll
call
it
apples
to
apples,
because
I
think
on
paragraph
102
it
says
that
you,
mr.
Thompson,
made
his
cost
estimates.
You've
reviewed
those,
and
it
says
we
verified
that
the
cost
escalations
were
consistent
with
escalation
calculations
used
for
the
SSE
and
other
TTC
projects.
So
you
would
say
he
made
his
own
conclusions
before
he
ever
met
you.
You
reviewed
his
conclusions
and
you
have
found
that
they're
consistent
with
other
projects
and
they
were
appropriate.
H
C
H
D
For
clarity,
we
didn't
audit
everything
that
was
provided
to
Council
what
we
looked
at
was
there
any
evidence
of
manipulation
or
politicization,
and
we
found
none
of
that.
We
found
counsel
we're
trying
staffs
confirmed
that
they
were
trying
to
provide
the
best
information
that
they
had
and
we
didn't
find
anything
to
the
contrary.
Okay,.
E
D
I
E
D
E
D
C
Point
on
the
kennedy
station:
yes
yeah,
we
did
contact
Metrolinx
on
that
and
they
did
say
they
would
they.
They
would
be
willing
to
consider
doing
everything
at
the
same
time,
but
it
was
up
to
legal
and
contractual
negotiations
that
would
take
place
so
just
to
clarify
a
little
bit.
It's
not
a
yes/no
and.
E
E
So
the
information
I
mean
the
information
was
correct.
So
now,
are
you
aware
that
that
Gary
Carter
tDCS
point
person,
one
of
the
people
preparing
the
briefing
notes
met
with
Metrolinx,
as
he
was
preparing
the
briefing
note
and
to
my
knowledge,
never
consulted
with
them
about
about
the
court
or
a
question?
Is
that
not
true
so.
E
In
point
23
of
your
reports,
Joan
Taylor,
the
TTC
CEOs
chief
of
staff,
sent
an
email
to
her
staff,
asking
them
to
only
identify
and
just
reading
from
the
report,
identify
any
constraints
and
issues
to
reintroducing
an
LRT.
Now
so
not
balancing
or
look
at
both
sides,
but
only
constraints
and
issues
to
introduce
you
know.
Where
is
he
now?
The
report
suggests
that
the
idea
of
the
briefing
node
in
question
came
solely
from
TTC
staff.
E
D
For
clarity
actually
didn't
only
come
from
staff.
The
city
yeah,
the
city
also
was
interested
in
and
the
comparison,
so
it
was
not
just
from
one
person.
It
wasn't
just
from
joan
joan
taylor,
the
chief
of
staff.
It
was
also
the
city
had
questions
and,
and
it
was
a
multiple
staff
from
different
from
different
organizations.
It
did
come
from.
It
was
in
preparation
for
the
chair,
as
we've
outlined,
but
I
did.
The
question
is
from
all
the
information
we
review
didn't
come
from
the
chair.
D
E
E
If,
if
there
were
factual
errors
throughout
the
report,
as
has
been
confirmed,
and
if
TT,
if
the
TTC-
let's
say
hypothetically,
did
prepare
a
briefing
note
specifically
for
the
chair
in
the
mayor
and
then
did
not
submit
it
to
Council
and
circulate
it
properly
with
the
bylaws
instructions,
would
you
find
that
to
be
appropriate?
Would
you
find
that
to
be.
F
F
E
F
H
You
mr.
chair
and,
of
course,
would
like
to
thank
the
Auditor
General
and
the
called
the
consultants
that
she
retained,
because
the
accusations
that
were
made
Axia
I
would
say
are
profoundly
disturbing
if
the
accusations
were
true
and
these
accusations
were
all
over
the
Twitterverse
read
by
tens
of
thousands
of
people,
we
had
councillors
on
radio
casting
aspersions
and
naming
names
on
CBC
broadcasts
another
broadcast
and
went
out
to
hundreds
of
thousands
of
people
saying
that
staff
were
misleading
council.
H
That
is
that
that
is
a
very
serious
offence
that
I
I
think
if
these
results
were
different,
might
actually
have
cost
somebody
their
job.
So
when
somebody
talks
about
political
interference,
providing
inaccurate,
incomplete
and
misleading
information
to
council
that
evidence
was
manipulated,
these
were
very
serious
allegations.
They
have
impacted
and
could,
in
the
future
impact
people's
future
careers
and
I'm
glad
that
the
Auditor
General
made
that
I'll
call
it
decision
to
say
you
know
what
this
is
serious
enough,
that
this
needs
to
be
looked
at
and
I.
H
Look
this
at
this
as
exonerating
our
staff
endorsing
what
our
staff
did.
There
is
no
manipulation
in
this
report
at
all
by
any
city
councilor
that
I'm,
aware
of
by
the
mayor
of
our
city.
People
specifically
mentioned
that
the
mayor's
trying
to
manipulate
things,
it's
simply
false.
They
tried
to
say
that
perhaps
our
chief
planner
was
either
hiding
or
misleading
or
not
doing
things
appropriately.
That
is
totally
false.
There
are
there
insinuations
that
the
our
CEO
of
the
TTC
Andy
Byford,
somehow
misleading
counsel,
nothing
could
be
further
from
the
truth.
H
Our
staff
have
passed
this
with
flying
colors.
The
information
they
gave
us
was
the
best
they
could
do
at
the
time,
and
in
fact
we
reviewed
the
auditor-general
hasn't
we.
We
went
through
thousands
of
documents,
a
very
thick
binder
there
and
there's
I'm
sure
more
back
in
the
office,
but
they
they
reviewed
this
because
it
is
such
a
serious
matter
and
they
have
found.
H
The
information
given
to
us
by
staff
was
correct
and
when
the
TTC
staff
tell
us
that
the
LRT
is
2.9
billion
dollars
based
on
apples
to
apples
with
the
subway,
that
information
is
accurate.
The
staff
gave
us
information.
There
was
rationale.
There
was
escalation.
We
got
right
down
to
the
percentage
escalator
on
different
items.
We
know
the
facts
now.
H
The
facts
are
that
our
staff
gave
us
very
good
information
and
counsel
made
a
very
good
decision
endorsing
and
and
supporting
the
subway
for
the
ninth
time
and
those
facts
go
along
with
facts
that
Scarborough
has
33
percent
of
the
city's
population
and
only
5%
of
the
subway
system.
Why
is
it
that
33
percent
of
the
population
does
not
have
a
level
of
transit
service
that
nobody
else
does
a
lot
of
historical
reasons
for
that
council
made
the
right
decision.
H
The
fact
that
this
station
will
be
one
of
the
busiest
subway
stations
ever
built
is
a
good
thing
for
the
City
of
Toronto.
To
do
it
demonstrates
why
we
made
our
decisions
on
facts
and
why
we
have
endorsed
the
subway
across
the
city
on
nine
different
occasions.
It's
a
fact
that
this
subway
is
100%
funded
by
the
city
and
our
provincial
and
federal
governments.
H
Other
projects
not
funded
this
project,
a
fact
100%
funded,
but
some
people
want
to
ignore
those
facts:
a
fact
that
19
out
of
20
elected
count
members
in
Scarborough,
every
federal
MP,
every
provincial
MPP
and
nine
out
of
ten
councilors
19
out
of
20
elected
people
in
Scarborough,
who
represent
the
six
hundred
and
twenty
five
thousand
people
in
Scarborough
I've
said
this
is
a
transportation
project
that
we
need
for
our
part
of
the
city,
nineteen
out
of
twenty.
It's
a
fact
that
some
people
choose
to
ignore.
H
So
when
I
see
19
elected
officials
I'm
just
going
to
ignore
them,
it's
a
fact
that
this
subway
station
will
be
one
of
the
busiest
subway
stations
in
the
entire
system.
On
a
daily
basis,
64,000
riders
a
day
are
going
through
this
system.
Only
fifty
thousand
at
Queen
Street,
only
twenty-five
thousand
at
Wellesley,
and
only
about
10,000
at
Rosedale
I,
could
propose
a
value
for
money.
Audit
on
keeping
the
Rosedale
subway
station
open
or
many
many
others,
but
I'm
not
because
I
understand
the
good
people
of
Rosedale.
H
The
good
people
who
live
in
downtown
Toronto
deserve
high
order
of
transit,
but
every
part
of
the
city
deserves
high
order.
Transit
I'll
celebrate
when
the
York
University
subway
station
opens
and
I'll
sub
I'll
celebrate
when
the
Scarborough
subway
opens.
I
recommend
that
stuff
adopt
council
adopt
this
and
thank
staff
again
for
their
hard
work.
Thank.
E
Chair
the
TTC
provided
a
briefing
note
on
a
project
that
wasn't
theirs.
Rather
it
was
Metro
laces
and
that's
the
fact
that
wasn't
easily
discernible.
From
the
briefing
note
itself,
the
briefing
note
makes
no
mention
that
the
costs
would
be
the
provinces.
The
timing
section
of
the
note
even
suggest
the
city
as
staff
and
TDC
would
be
designing.
The
LRT
and
many
of
the
assertions
given
by
the
TTC
that
made
reverting
back
to
the
LRT
look
impossible
were
easily
verifiable
you
simply
by
asking
Metro
links
or
just
googling.
E
Clearly
states
of
the
corridor
could
accommodate
an
ort,
further
Gary
Carr,
who
was
tasked
by
the
TTC
with
preparing
the
briefing
notes
met
in
person
with
the
person
in
charge
at
Metro
links
for
the
corridor
and
June
23rd
after
he
was
assigned.
To
do
the
briefing
note
and
to
my
knowledge
he
didn't
ask
this
verifiable
question.
Metrolinx
later
confirmed
that
its
go
re,
our
plans
never
conflicted
with
the
LRT
in
the
corridor.
In
the
brief
he
noted
says,
with
the
change
in
technology,
confirmation
of
contributions
from
funding
partners
may
be
required,
but
that's
not
true.
E
The
facts
actually
are
that
the
province
is
bound
by
the
existing
master
agreement
and
the
federal
government
has
stated
publicly
that
their
funding
was
committed
to
scarborough,
regardless
of
the
technology.
The
seventh
stop
IRT
was
last
estimated,
as
they
said
earlier
at
one
point
for
eight
million
a
billion
dollars,
as
opposed
to
3.3
billion
for
one
subway
stop.
However,
the
TTC
adds
three
hundred
and
twenty
million
dollars
to
the
costs
due
to
changes
at
Kennedy
station.
E
According
to
the
AG
Metrolink
CEO
Bruce
mcquaig
tells
Andy
Byford
On
June
29th
that
the
three
hundred
and
twenty
million
dollars
should
be
taken
out.
But
after
this
error
was
brought
to
the
TTC's
attention,
they
did
nothing
to
correct
it.
The
TTC
didn't
change
the
information
when
they
provided
a
copy
of
the
briefing
note
to
the
mayor's
office
and
the
chair
of
the
TTC.
E
That
is
a
fact.
The
AG
is
underlying
the
parts
of
the
cdc's
code
of
conduct
in
the
public
service
bylaw
that
points
to
deliberately
misleading
council.
So
what
what
the
report
seems
to
ignore
is
the
portion
of
the
TTC's
code
of
conduct
it
states
it
is
every
employees
responsibility
to
ensure
that
all
information
collected
producer
obtained
in
the
course
of
their
duties
and
responsibilities
is
as
accurate
as
possible,
as
well
as
the
expectation
of
staff
to
provide
objective
advice.
E
The
evidence
suggests
that
neither
of
these
tests
were
met
and
I,
don't
believe
for
a
minute
that
the
request
for
the
briefing
note
began
at
the
TTC.
Any
objective
analysis
of
the
LRT
should
have
included
at
the
very
minimum
verification
by
Metrolinx.
The
removal
of
the
320
million
after
it
was
brought
to
their
attention
and
bouncing
information
that
including
capital
costs
would
be
borne
by
Metrolinx,
provides
more
stops
for
a
lower
costs,
serves
more
priority.
E
Neighborhoods
could
be
built
faster,
more
advanced
stage
of
design
than
the
subway
and
would
be
in
its
own
corridor
and
capable
of
traveling
at
the
team's
same
top
speed
as
the
subway
it's
troubling
at
the
briefie
note
was
only
distributed
to
my
knowledge,
to
the
TTC
chair
and
to
the
mayor's
office,
both
of
whom
strongly
opposed
the
seven
stop
our
tea
and
then
add.
In
a
day
later,
the
briefing
note
ends
up
exclusively
on
cp24
briefing
notes
pertaining
to
an
item.
E
That's
on
a
council
agenda
should
be
submitted
to
the
clerk
as
a
communication
for
the
public
and
every
councillor
to
read
the
first
time
the
TTC's
briefing
note
was
made
to
the
public
through
the
city
was
right
here
today
at
audit
committee.
It
should
be
clear
to
any
reasonable
person
that
the
public
service
Bilaam
regarding
distribution
was
not
followed,
and
there
was
a
signal.
There
were
significant
errors
in
the
information
provided
and
equally
concerning
relevant
emitted
and
I'm.
E
Just
gonna
conclude
by
saying
the
briefie
note
was
ultimately
used
as
a
political
tool
that
influenced
the
outcome
of
a
council
vote
that
led
to
a
one-stop
subway
that
will
serve
far
fewer
scarper
residents
for
over
a
billion
dollars
more
of
the
city's
limited
funds.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
You
counsel.
F
G
D
Yeah
I
will
start
and
then
perhaps
my
assistant
daughter,
general
can
jump
in
so
TTC
has
about
two
hundred
and
seventy
nine
billion
dollars
that
it
million
three
million
dollars
that
it
spends
on
procurement
and
of
that
there's
about
80
81
million.
That's
spent
for
things
that
are
recurring
like
recurring
oil,
memberships
subscriptions
and
internal
audit
had
done
some
work
there
and
they
they
did
a
pretty
good
job.
D
But
we
went
into
look
because
we
wanted
to
understand
and
and
verify
that
the
controls
are
in
place
and
and
also
at
the
same
time
be
able
to
rely
on
them.
Have
a
look
at
the
internal
lot
at
work
and
what
we
found
was
that
there's
two
kinds
were
focused
on
not
three-way
match
which
three-way
match
is.
When
you
have
the
amount
that's
being
ordered
in
the
system.
You
have
somebody
paying
and
you
have
somebody
receiving
that
piece.
We
thought
would
be
pretty
well
controlled,
less
risk.
D
The
piece
we
thought
would
be
more
risk
these
recurring
charges
and-
and
at
that
point
in
time
when,
when
the
invoice
comes
in
the
accounts
payable,
has
to
rely
on
people
in
the
field
to
make
sure
they
can
verify
the
goods
coming
in
and
it's
very
important
job,
because
if
they're
recurring
charges
generally,
you
have
to
make
sure
that
they're
right.
So
that
really
was
the
real.
We
had
some
issues
around
the
system:
around
duplicate
payments
controls.
We
have
issues
around
them.
D
You
know
access
controls,
but
essentially
the
payment
issues
related
to
not
in
the
processing
of
the
accounts
payable,
but
in
the
user
group
understanding
their
role
and
how
important
it
is
to
verify
the
goods
coming
in
the
door.
So
that's
a
high
level.
If
you
want
more
that
my
assistant,
our
general,
can
provide
I
can.
J
Just
give
a
very
brief,
a
synopsis,
essentially
the
key
finding
from
this
audit
is
it's
a
very
basic
fundamental
control
in
payment
you
and
I.
When
you
will
see,
if
appear,
we
will
look
at
it
and
make
sure
the
rate.
The
charge
rate
is
correct.
The
charge,
among
is
correct,
so
we
expecting
the
same
for
user
tip,
TTC
user
Department.
We
took
a
random
sample
of
41
invoices.
These
are
small
dollar
invoice,
but
month
to
month,
reoccurring
invoices
and
we
found
nine
invoices.
They
were
not
adequately
review
and
approve
like
questions
like
people.
J
Mistakenly,
the
vendors
send
a
future
wheelchair
Vento
invoice
belonging
to
another
customers,
but
they
mistakenly
somehow
send
it
to
TTC
staff,
but
the
staff,
for
whatever
reason
they
approve
it
for
payments
instead
of
question
about
it.
So
they're
Niall
consists
when
we
calculate,
even
though
these
are
very
small
dollar,
among
maybe
like
the
overpayment,
maybe
$200
here
300,
but
when
you're,
multiple
by
this
by
hundreds
of
thousands
of
invoices
every
year
that
happen,
the
overall,
like
the
saving,
potential
saving,
could
be
significant
and
and
that's
the
key
message
from
our
audit.
G
D
You
for
the
question
through
you,
mr.
chair,
they
do
and
you
know,
we've
had
other
audits
where
it
would
be
an
end-to-end
change
like
some
of
the
inventory
and
some
of
the
procurement
in
this
area.
It's
really
focused
on
getting
the
user
departments
trained
and
then
there's
some
other
areas
that
need
to
be
addressed.
So
they
do
get
it
actually
staffer
here.
They
understand
and
and
I
have
every
confidence
that
it's
going
to
be
implemented
in
a
you
know,
in
a
timely
fashion
so
and
it's
very
doable
so
staff
are
behind
you
actually
yeah.
D
Two
there's
two
areas:
I
would
say
in
January
have
another
one,
but
for
me
the
one
area
is
in
the
training
of
the
people
who
are
receiving
the
goods
to
make
sure
they
actually
verify.
When
you
Seve
could
be
internet
charges
or
it
could
be
oil
making
sure
they
understand.
They
have
to
verify
exactly
that.
They've
received
what
it
says
on
the
invoice
they
may
think
accounts
payables,
looking
at
it,
but
accounts
payable,
is
job
is
to
process
the
payment
it's
their
job,
to
receive
it.
D
So
that's
on
the
one
side,
on
the
other
side,
around
duplicate
payments
or
duplicate
payment
controls.
That's
an
area
where
there's
a
little
bit
more
requirement
around
putting
better
controls
in
place
to
ensure
there's,
no
duplicate
payments
and
there's
some
system
upgrades
that
are
needed
and
I
see
TTC
shaking
their
head.
Yes,
they
may
choose
to
do
them
now,
or
they
may
choose
to
do
those
when
the
new
system
comes
in
SA,
P
Steven.
Would
you
like
to
comment
any
more
more
than
that.
F
F
Again,
there's
some
areas
in
training
where
we
think
we
can
focus
on
training
moving
forward
through
ensuring
that
we're
looking
essentially
doing
some
spot
audits
on
some
of
the
POS
that
we
have
today
and
we're
gonna
identify
training
and
education
around
areas
where
we
think
there
are
opportunities
there,
B
in
certain
areas
or
certain
types
of
purchases
and
systems
we
do
have
do
have
some
pretty
old
systems
that
are
in
the
process
of
being
updated
and
there's.
Certain
system
can
train.
E
D
Just
one
more
comment
sure:
yes,
we
will
be
going
back
in
one
year
and
we
will
be
again
taking
a
sample
of
a
similar
type
in
a
similar
area
and
we
expect
to
see
a
difference.
So
TTC
can
tell
their
user
departments
that
we
will
be
come
back
and
doing
that
and
testing
it
again.
So
that
might
provide
you
at
the
leverage
you
need
to.
F
You
councillor
Ford
I,
even
spired
me
to
ask
my
own
question
and
I
shall
make
an
offer
to
any
other
members
of
the
committee
there.
Any
other
questions,
no
I,
think
I
have
one
I
took
notice
that,
in
terms
of
scale,
the
findings,
although
it
was
no
small
amount
of
money
in
terms
of
scale
on
to
billion
dollars
of
purchases,
would
I
be
correct.
F
D
If
any
one
million
dollars
I
think
it's
about
two
million
a
year--what,
so
that's
small
from
that
respect
but
perspective,
but
also
I,
just
think
they're
doable.
You
know
so
I
think
that's
that's
the
the
biggest
thing
and
so
I
think
that
that
puts
it
in
perspective.
I
think
staff
should
be
the
Callas
papal
staff
should
be.
You
know,
congratulated
that
they're
processing
things
for
the
most
part,
very,
very
good,
there's
some
improvement
areas,
but
this
is
not
a
situation
where
everything
is
broken
up
by
by
a
far
stretch
at
all.
Okay.
F
D
F
Thank
you
very
much.
Are
there
any
members
wishing
to
speak
on
this
item?
Seeing
none
I
will
put
the
recommendations
forth
and
then
the
recommendation
is:
is
that
City
Council
receive
for
information
this
item
all
those
in
favor
any
opposed
that
is
carried
I
believe
that
is
the
last
item
of
business
today.
I
wish
to
thank
everyone
that
made
it
through
to
the
end
today,
your
time,
members
of
the
committee,
madam
auditor,
the
audit
team
and,
of
course,
the
clerk's
team.
This
meeting
is
adjourned.