Meeting Transcript: Humber River–Black Creek (Sep 4, 2025)
- Date: September 4, 2025
- Source: Greater Toronto Airports Authority (Recording)
- Submitted To: PMO, Transport, Health, Environment, Justice, and Finance Committees
- Response: None (Silence)
MP Judy Sgro’s constituency office has now informed residents that it is “closing the case” on the September 4, 2025 meeting, despite never securing the full attendee list with names, titles, and direct contact details that was promised at the meeting and confirmed again in writing on October 2, 2025. When asked whether NAV CANADA, Transport Canada, or GTAA had refused to provide this information, the office stated there was “no further documentation, written refusal, or direct contact information” to share and declined further follow-up. Pearson Accountability Alliance is documenting this as an example of how institutional promises to residents can be quietly abandoned without a clear record of refusal or accountability. This email chain is now part of the public record for this meeting.
These minutes are published to provide a primary, contemporaneous record of statements made by GTAA, NAV CANADA, elected officials, and community members. They expose the gap between public promises and private admissions.
1. The Transparency Failure: A Timeline of Obstruction
Blair Ostrom (GTAA) sends an invite without an attendee list.
Resident Response: “Issuing an invitation without disclosing the full list of attendees creates a lack of transparency… almost like a trial by combat.”
Amy Calderan (MP Sgro’s Office) emails: “Steve Thomas mentioned he would forward me the contact information… Once I receive the full list, I’ll be sure to forward it to you.”
Amy Calderan shifts the burden:
“As for NAV Canada… I would recommend reaching out to them directly for clarification. I’ve yet to receive a response from Transport Canada.” — Email from MP Sgro’s Office
Critical Failure: NAV CANADA is a private entity exempt from Access to Information laws. By telling a constituent to “ask them directly,” the MP’s office sent them into a legal dead end.
Amy Calderan finally sends an “updated list” (two months late). It contains generic customer service inboxes
(service@navcanada.ca, aviation.ont@tc.gc.ca) instead of direct contacts. This deliberate
obfuscation protects officials from accountability.
Residents have been forced to file an Access to Information (ATI) request (A-2025-00422) simply to find out who they met with. This is currently under investigation by the Information Commissioner.
2. The Indictment: Funding Failure & Parliamentary Lies
The community’s formal response to MP Sgro didn’t just express anger; it provided forensic evidence of government malfeasance. This evidence was sent to the Prime Minister and five Standing Committees.
A. Rewarding Bad Behavior
While officials claimed they were “powerless” to enforce the lease, the federal government was actively funneling tax dollars to the GTAA:
- $142 Million (2022): Granted via the Airport Critical Infrastructure Program (ACIP).
- $94 Million (2023): Granted via the National Trade Corridors Fund.
- 20-Year Lease Extension (Dec 2024): The government extended the GTAA’s lease to 2076 despite documented non-compliance.
B. The Parliamentary Lie
The letter accuses former Transport Minister Pablo Rodriguez of misleading the public by claiming Transport Canada “has no jurisdiction” over noise.
The Challenge: Residents formally challenged MP Sgro to raise a Question of Privilege to correct this falsehood on the parliamentary record. She refused.
The Result: Zero engagement. Despite being sent this evidence, not a single oversight body responded.
Download the Letter Sent to All Committees (PDF) – coming soon.
3. The “Balance” Hypocrisy
| Written Promise (Oct 9, 2025) | Spoken Reality (Sep 4, 2025) |
|---|---|
|
“My focus is on advocating for balanced solutions that reflect all sides of this reality.”
— MP Judy Sgro |
“I don’t know that there’s going to be a solution… I do not see a solution to the noise issue…
[Operational changes are] impractical.”
— MP Judy Sgro |
The Community Rebuttal
In her email, MP Sgro complained about “late-night calls” to her office, citing a “zero-tolerance policy” for harassment. The community’s response exposed the double standard:
4. Winds Aloft, Secret Data & Being “Agnostic” to Traffic
When residents challenged the claim that “the wind” explains 95% east–west operations, NAV CANADA’s Jonathan Bagg introduced a new concept: winds aloft. He admitted that NAV relies on upper-air wind information that is not visible to the public.
When asked why, he explained that this data is provided by airlines and that NAV CANADA “does not have a manner of publishing it.” Residents pointed out that if NAV can receive the data, NAV can also publish it, just as they publish surface winds. This exchange confirms that:
- NAV CANADA is using non-public wind inputs to justify runway choices; and
- The very data used to defend east–west operations is deliberately withheld from the people living under those flight paths.
When you presented Environment Canada wind records showing entire months where winds were not a constraint, Bagg refused to engage with the analysis:
Moments later, Daryl forced the core admission. He summarized what NAV had just said:
Bagg replied: “Correct.” That single word confirms that north–south runway use is avoided not because of safety, but because it would slow down throughput and create system-wide delays. In other words, the operational pattern is driven by capacity, not by an unavoidable wind constraint.
Later, when pressed on responsibility for the overall volume of traffic, Bagg tried to step away from the consequences:
In the room, this landed as a shrug toward the GTAA sitting across from him: NAV CANADA claims it simply “moves” whatever the airport and airlines send. GTAA, in turn, points back to Transport Canada and the lease. The result is a closed loop of deniability where:
- NAV CANADA uses non-public wind data and throughput arguments to keep east–west operations in place;
- GTAA cites “demand” and “national connectivity” to justify growth; and
- No one at the table accepts responsibility for the health consequences of that traffic pattern on the ground.
Key evidence: In a single segment of the transcript, NAV CANADA simultaneously invokes hidden “winds aloft,” confirms that east–west is chosen for maximum throughput, and then claims to be “agnostic” to how much traffic is forced over residential neighbourhoods at night.
5. Full Transcript (PDF)
Your browser does not support embedded PDFs. Download the PDF .
Take Action: Demand Real Contact Info
Send a formal letter citing these contradictions and the fake emails.
Enter your details below, review the letter, then copy, email, or download it.
Review, Copy, and Send (Email or Mail)
Pearson Accountability Alliance
Independent Environmental & Public Health Research for Toronto Pearson Communities.