New email prompts request for another Ontario Greenbelt review

A newly-surfaced internal email is prompting the Ontario New Democratic Party to ask for another review into the Doug Ford government’s decision to open up the Greenbelt for development.

The email, obtained by the NDP through a Freedom of Information Act request, shows the premier’s then-principal secretary was sent a list of criteria for removing land from the protected area on Oct. 17—information the opposition says contradicts testimony previously provided to Integrity Commissioner J. David Wake.

The email, from Ryan Amato, then chief-of-staff to Housing Minister Steve Clark, has the subject heading of “Special Project – GB” and was sent to the personal email address of Patrick Sackville, the-principal secretary to the premier. Sackville is now Ford’s chief of staff.

The email doesn’t include much text. Instead it simply lists the criteria for land removal, including location, infrastructure services, and potential offsets.

It’s unclear in the documents if this email was read, forwarded, or acted upon by Sackville.

• Download our app to get local alerts on your device
• Get the latest local updates right to your inbox

In a statement to CTV News Toronto, a spokesperson for the premier’s office said that Sackville did not respond to Amato’s email.

The premier’s office also said the email “mirrors what was being briefed on at the time.”

In late August, Wake released a report finding that Clark broke the Member’s Integrity Act when carving up the Greenbelt for development, leading to “the private interests of certain developers being furthered improperly.”

The 166-page report outlined a “chaotic and almost reckless process” lacking in leadership and supervision. It also suggested that political staff were receiving emails from lobbyists and other external parties on personal email accounts, and that government emails were often at times forwarded back and forth.

• Ontario integrity commissioner report finds Steve Clark broke ethic rules

A similar auditor general report suggested the decision-making process lacked transparency and failed to consider environmental, agricultural and financial impacts.

Amato, who was widely named as the decision-maker who chose the 15 sites to be removed from the Greenbelt, resigned from his position shortly after the auditor general report dropped. Clark also resigned from his cabinet position following both reports.

The integrity commissioner previously found that Amato had begun to brief the premier’s office about the removal of land from the Greenbelt on Oct. 17. However, testimony from Sackville himself indicated, “he did not discuss specific properties to be removed or removal criteria with Mr. Amato until the briefing that occurred on Oct. 27, 2022.”

On that basis, and the basis that these emails were obtained from a personal account, the NDP say they were prompted to call for another review.

The NDP say the integrity commissioner has acknowledged their letter and will need time to review the evidence “not only of Mr. Sackville, but other witnesses to determine whether there was an inconsistency in the evidence.”

If they determine there is an inconsistency, the integrity commissioner will deliver an official opinion on the matter.

The office of the integrity commissioner clarified that while they cannot conduct a fulsome investigation on this matter, as it does not relate to the Member’s Integrity Act, they will review the document against office records.

“Commissioner Wake has informed Ms. Stiles that he would review the document against Office records and provide a response to her directly,” spokesperson Michelle Renaud said.

The lands removed from the Greenbelt have since been returned following a bill tabled by the Progressive Conservatives in October 2023, nearly a year after the premier’s office was first briefed.

At the time, Ford apologized for removing the Greenbelt land and pledged not to make any changes in the future.

The bill reversing the Greenbelt changes, which received royal assent in December, also includes liability protections for those who acted “in good faith.” It’s unclear who falls within these new protections.