A small town in eastern Ontario, Brighton, had plans to hire a well-connected lobbying firm, Atlas Strategic Advisors, to help secure funding for upgrades to its water treatment facility worth tens of millions of dollars. However, comments made by councillors during a meeting about “backroom” conversations with administration that “talks to their friends” were used by opposition parties at Queen’s Park to suggest favoritism by the Ford government. As a result, the plan was quickly cancelled, and Brighton’s mayor spent much of Thursday apologizing to the provincial government for the comments that were deemed “regrettable.”
During a meeting on May 6, city staff recommended retaining Atlas Strategic Advisors to push for funding through a provincial grant pool worth $825 million. The firm, run by former Ford government staffer Amin Massoudi, was seen as crucial due to its connections with the government. Councillors in Brighton agreed that having a lobbyist with ties to Queen’s Park would help ensure the town’s infrastructure needs were met. However, opposition politicians criticized the government for favoring political insiders and forcing municipalities to hire lobbyists to be heard.
Brighton Mayor Brian Ostrander acknowledged that Atlas withdrew its services from the town after the controversial comments were made, possibly to protect their reputation. Ostrander spent time apologizing to various individuals, including Labour Minister David Piccini, in light of the backlash that followed. Despite the criticism, Housing Minister Paul Calandra dismissed the idea that hiring lobbyists would give municipalities an advantage, calling it a waste of taxpayer money. He urged those using lobbyists to reconsider their approach, stating it wasn’t an effective strategy to secure government funding.
Ostrander defended the initial plan to hire a lobbying firm, explaining that lobbyists have the ability to engage with provincial staff in a way that politicians cannot. He emphasized the importance of having someone with relationships and connections to advocate for Brighton’s $23 million project effectively. While Ostrander acknowledged the need for behind-the-scenes communication, he clarified that the intention was not to undermine the government, but rather to ensure that the town’s needs were effectively communicated at the staff level. Despite the setback with Atlas, Ostrander indicated that Brighton may not seek another lobbying firm to replace them.
Overall, the controversy surrounding Brighton’s decision to hire a lobbying firm highlights the complex dynamics of securing government funding for infrastructure projects. While connections and relationships can be beneficial in advocating for funding, there is also a risk of appearing to engage in insider dealing. The incident serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability in government decision-making processes, particularly when it comes to allocating public resources. As Brighton continues to pursue upgrades to its water treatment facility, it will be essential for the town to navigate these challenges effectively to ensure that its infrastructure needs are met.
