Pearson Accountability Alliance

The Myth of a “Mandate to Fulfill Demand” at Toronto Pearson

For years, residents living around Toronto Pearson have been told that airport operations — including traffic growth, night flights, and concentrated runway use — are unavoidable because aviation authorities allegedly have a “mandate to fulfill demand.”

This phrase is repeatedly used as a conversation-ending justification: if demand must be fulfilled, then impacts on health, sleep, and quality of life are presented as regrettable but inevitable.

The record shows something very different.

---

This Is Not a New Claim — It Is a Long-Standing Talking Point

The phrase “mandate to fulfill demand” (or close variants such as “mandate to meet demand” or “mandate to serve demand”) has been used for many years by aviation institutions in public meetings and community engagements.

It did not originate in the September 4, 2025 meeting.
That meeting matters because it is the first time the claim was formally challenged on the record and followed by a written request for its legal source.

---

Follow-Up in Writing: The Claim Is Tested Against the Lease

After receiving the transcript, a written follow-up was sent to GTAA. That email did three things:

1. Confirmed that GTAA had told residents it has a “mandate to fulfill demand.”
2. Examined the specific lease provision GTAA later referenced (s. 8.02.03(a)).
3. Compared it to the controlling clause (s. 8.02.01).

The result was unambiguous:

• The phrase “fulfill demand” does not appear anywhere in the Ground Lease.
• The actual operating obligation is explicitly qualified, not absolute.
• It is limited by a regional catchment of roughly 75 km, the phrase “to the extent practicable”, and compliance with federal policies, procedures, and practices — including environmental and public-health protections.

---

What the Ground Lease Actually Requires

When GTAA representatives describe a “mandate to fulfill demand,” they are not quoting the Ground Lease — they are describing a policy preference. The controlling clause, section 8.02.01, requires the GTAA to operate, maintain, and develop the airport:

• “to the extent practicable” — not at any cost and not without limits;
• within a defined regional catchment of approximately 75 km around the airport; and
• subject to the federal government’s policies, procedures, and practices, including environmental and public-health protections.

In other words, the lease constrains operations rather than forcing growth. Environmental law and federal policy set the frame; “demand” does not override those constraints.

Why This Matters Legally

The fact that the phrase has been used for years does not make it lawful. Repeating a phrase without legal grounding does not create an obligation under the lease.

In fact, long-term repetition without a legal citation strongly suggests that a policy preference has been presented as an obligation. When a claim is finally tested against the governing document, it must stand or fall on the text. Here, it falls.

---

Bottom Line

Demand does not create a mandate. Law does.

If a phrase has been used for years but cannot be anchored to text when challenged, it is not a mandate — it is a narrative. And narratives must yield to accountability.

---

Take Action: Challenge the “Mandate”

The “Mandate to Fulfill Demand” is the core story used to defend harmful operations. Use the tool below to turn the lease analysis into a formal letter, then send it using the standard “Where to Direct This Evidence” cards from the Evidence Hub.

Step 1: Generate, Copy & Send Your Letter

Step 2: Use the “Where to Direct This Evidence” tools

Use the standard PAA contact cards below to send your letter to federal, provincial, municipal, and public-health decision-makers. These shortcodes keep the contacts synchronized with the rest of the Evidence Hub.

---

---

---