“Maybe it’s too fun for Toronto”: Why this former Liberal MP is defending Doug Ford’s Ontario Place megaspa

Even by “not on my 2025 bingo card” standards, Adam Vaughan’s rebirth as staunch defender (and paid employee) of Therme, the Austrian company behind the province’s megaspa plan, is a shock. Yes, that Adam Vaughn—the former City TV newsie turned city councillor turned Liberal Party of Canada politico who famously railed against Doug Ford’s plan to sell off Ontario Place. In March, Vaughan, who has worked as a lobbyist since leaving politics in 2021, took a job as a senior adviser on Therme’s Ontario Place project. “I was never afraid to call out the premier when he was wrong,” he says. “But, in this case, I’m happy to hand it to him.” Here, he explains his surprise career shift, why Toronto needs to get over its anti-Ford sentiment and why green space (including Ontario Place) is never free.

As I watch you, a former Liberal stalwart and champion of public space, flip over to Team Megaspa, I think I speak for a lot of Torontonians when I say, “We’re not mad, Adam, we’re just disappointed.” Ha. I’d forgotten what NDP Twitter was like. I think that if people disagree with me, fine, but I wish this whole situation didn’t have to be so disagreeable. I would love to see us having a conversation rather than a fight. Someone on social media just said that my dead father would be disappointed in me. I don’t think this person knew my father, but I have his ashes, and I haven’t seen them roll over. My parents first came to Toronto in the 1950s, and like most families that don’t go back generations, we didn’t have a cottage up north. We had a little tiny sailboat, and we used to race it on Lake Ontario, or we’d be at the Toronto Sailing and Canoe Club. We used to sneak into Ontario Place because it got too expensive for us to get into, then we’d wander around or skip stones.

I love the waterfront, and that’s why, when I got into politics, I fought so hard for housing down there, for parks down there, for transit, and to balance the industrial uses against cultural and recreational uses. When Ontario Place closed and then sat abandoned for so many years, that was really hard to see. I am happy to be involved in a project that is going to revitalize this space that is beloved to so many Torontonians. Of course there are concerns, as with any public project that is balancing various interests. I’ve been following this project since it first came across my desk as an MP, and I can’t tell you how happy I am to see it moving forward.

Related: Therme Group CEO Robert Hanea on his controversial plans for Ontario Place

I’m sure you’ve seen the footage of you circulating on social media from a 2019 Waterfront For All meeting. You’re railing against Doug Ford’s plan to sell off Ontario Place. Isn’t that what the Therme project is? No more than the Budweiser Stage, which the NDP government created a lease for back in the ’90s. There has always been private sector involvement in Ontario Place, whether it’s the marina or fast food courts or even the water park back in the day. Much like the yacht club or the airport on the Toronto Islands. It’s about finding a balance between recreational facilities that have an admission fee and free public space, where the former plays a role in financing the latter. Going back to the worries I had years ago, I didn’t trust the Ford government to get some of the key fundamentals right.

Which key fundamentals, specifically? The first has always been public access to the water’s edge. That’s a non-negotiable, but it wasn’t the case early in the planning process. There was going to be an admission fee to access the park and water space—just like there was with Ontario Place. Therme listened to that concern and adjusted accordingly. Now, that swimming and park space will be totally accessible and free. For the folks who like to swim down there, we’ve actually enhanced the number of places where you can jump into the lake from one spot to three. And for those who want clean water, finally, after decades, the open combined sewer pipe that has been coming out of the breakwall for longer than Ontario Place has existed is being addressed.

Related: A nostalgic tour of the glory years of Ontario Place

Addressed how? Opponents have been critical of the province’s plans to divert sewage. In the short term, we’re adding filters to improve water quality while the city and the province try to figure out how to rectify a bad situation—one that exists with or without Therme. When Toronto built its sewer system, the raw sewage was put in one section of the pipe and the rainwater in another. When you get a big storm, rainwater overflows into the sewage system, the two mix and you get outflow going into the lake. It’s just not a good way to manage wastewater. The lake itself is as clean as Georgian Bay, it’s just the water along the shoreline that is an issue. It gives people the wrong impression. I am always surprised by how few Torontonians swim in the lake. Have you?

Related: This group is leading the fight against the Ontario Place mega-spa

A few times, at the Toronto Islands. I think I swallowed five cigarette butts and grew an eyeball. Well, if anyone is dedicated to clean water, it’s Therme. That is what their whole business is based on: water as recreation, a therapeutic tool, a life force that everyone should be able to enjoy. The new beach is being designed to Universal Design standards, so people with mobility issues and other types of disabilities can have a well manicured pathway. If you still want to climb over those giant rocks at the old beach, go ahead. The point is that the shoreline will be maintained and publicly accessible.

The other huge concern for me was the casino proposal, and the new lease says, specifically, that there shall be no casino on the land. I was never afraid to disagree with the premier, but in this I think it’s important to give him his due. The plan has gone through four different evolutions of design, based in large part on concerns that came up in public hearings and meetings. That’s where we first heard the concerns about the proposed admission gate, which has since been removed. If that weren’t the case, I’d be out there protesting.

So then why do we keep hearing about a lack of public consultation? Opponents of a project are always going to say there wasn’t enough public consultation. That’s just politics in this part of the world. I think people forget that Ontario Place was never just a park. It became free only when it was abandoned by the government 15 years ago. Not surprisingly, it is not in good shape. The pods are sinking into the lake. The Cinesphere is leaking, and it’s dripping into the lagoons. Fixing this nostalgic architecture is expensive, and that’s why no government has gone near it for a couple of decades. You can spend public money, but then you have to explain why you don’t have as much for hospitals, schools and transit.

Okay, but aren’t we talking about a $2.2-billion cost to taxpayers? That’s a lot of streetcars. Bringing Ontario Place back online is an expensive proposition, for the reasons I just mentioned and many others. That’s the whole reason the provincial government started to look at new business models that will generate revenue, help to break even on the cost of the restoration and eventually make money. Therme is investing approximately $700 to $500 million for the spa facility and $200 million to restore the shoreline. In addition to that, we will pay $1.1 billion in rent and $855 million in maintenance fees, which will cover the maintenance of the new park. I understand that there are going to be people who want a park and only a park, but that was never the model of Ontario Place. This way we have a brand new 16-acre park and we have a way to fund it.

You say 16-acre park, your critics say a bunch of paths around the spa facility and rooftop areas that you are adding together to give a false impression of open green space. Look, you’re not gonna be able to play cricket down there, but you never could. This is mixed-use parkland where you can throw down a blanket and have a picnic, sit by the water, and throw a frisbee, but there is also space for holding cultural events and campfires, plus a new concert facility that will also be a skating rink in the winter.

The lease says that Therme can use the public space for its own events 30 per cent of the time. Yes, and Therme is known for its cultural events. It runs the largest modern theatre festival in Europe, much of which is free. It has invested in Super Blue, an immersive art space in Miami. It had access to the park spelled out in the lease so that it can stage events: movie nights, music, things like Luminato, Nuit Blanche, or dances at dusk, plus cultural events, many of them free, on the water’s edge. Why do people have a problem with that?

Do you have an answer? I think so much of this is the source of the proposal: people in Toronto don’t trust Doug Ford.

Should they? Skepticism is an important part of the political process, and challenging ideas is how good ideas become great. I have no doubt that the people behind Ontario Place for All have good intentions. But they seem to really love Trillium Park in the east end, and this is the same model. I get that the political climate of this conversation is heated, but what I’m saying is, don’t look at the source of the idea. Look at the quality and how it has evolved and responded to public concerns and to good ideas from so many sources—including our biggest critics.

I gather you approached Therme about your new job. What was your pitch? I met the people behind Therme back when I was a sitting MP. I was really interested, both as an elected official and as someone who comes from a family of architects. The initial designs were a lot more futuristic, but I thought it was something worth looking at. As the project evolved, I started to see an evolution of Ontario Place that could actually work. And then I started to notice how the architects behind the project—Diamond Schmitt, for example—were really getting pushed around, and I didn’t think that was fair. It just felt like the tone of the conversation, particularly on Twitter, was so vitriolic.

My dad’s firm won the contract to design the Canadian pavilion at Expo 67. Once, while at a party, he heard someone in line at the bar say, “I can’t believe they gave it to a bunch of fucking immigrants.” My dad tapped the guy and said, “They didn’t give it to a bunch of fucking immigrants, they gave it to a bunch of fucking good architects who live in Toronto. Why is my Australian citizenship an issue for you?” And if you think being Australian is tough in Toronto, try coming from Turkey or Iran or India or Hong Kong. I find the xenophobia around this project offensive. The “Austrian” spa company…

Aren’t Austrians the kind of immigrants a lot of bigots don’t take issue with? I think it’s the idea that they’re foreign. When did Toronto ever get better by being afraid of ideas from outside of our borders? The irony is that Eberhard Zeidler, who built Ontario Place, wasn’t born in Canada.

I don’t want to dismiss your point, but I think the angry tone you are describing relates more to Ontarians believing that they have been lied to by their government—and by a company that misrepresented itself to win a contract, according to a recent New York Times investigation. If you want to talk about the government process, take it up with the government. This project was front and centre in the last provincial election, where Ford was successful. The leader of Ontario Place for All, Norm Di Pasquale, just ran in the federal election, and he didn’t exactly sweep the polls.

What about the allegations against Therme? In its proposal, the company claimed to operate “six globally placed facilities,” when in reality, it owned a single facility at the time. There has been a long-standing partnership between Therme and the Josef Wund Foundation, which owned and operated five of those facilities—one of which is now owned by Therme. When the Wund family business started to shrink, Therme absorbed 200 people from that company. When we say that our team has designed, built and operated six facilities, that’s what we mean. It’s different from the North American model of business partnerships. Here, we’re used to hostile takeovers. But it is a long-standing partnership, and if it weren’t, don’t you think the Wund family would have something to say?

Didn’t the founder die in a plane crash? Yes, but the family and Therme continue to work together. The partnership that started before that unfortunate accident has continued.

What about the Times’ allegation that Therme misrepresented itself financially in its bid? We passed the asset test in the bidding process of being worth well over $100 million. Our Canadian company that put the bid in isn’t a multimillion-dollar company, but that’s how you build projects in this part of the world. It’s the same way you build condos: you set up a tiny numbered company to manage the risks on-site, but you’re part of a consortium of companies. The Times also says that we used the Toronto project to leverage an opportunity in Manchester, but I can tell you that the building permit for Manchester was in before the bid in Ontario was submitted. I’m not sure why the Times couldn’t figure that out. I think they were more interested in the scandal than the project.

You have been to Therme Bucharest. What was that like? That facility is very similar to what we’re building on the West Island, so it was really great to see. It has one area with crazy water slides and another with pools and recreational places with cabanas to rent or chairs that are out in the sunshine for free. There are mineral baths, cold plunges, a eucalyptus steam and a sauna, and it’s all for free once you pay the $30 admission—which is about the same as what it used to cost to get into Ontario Place. It was so much fun. Maybe it’s too much fun for Toronto.

Ouch. Do you think maybe we just aren’t as familiar with bathing culture? But we are. Torontonians from Korean cultures, from Finnish cultures, from Russian cultures and from Indigenous cultures all have different ways of doing hot and cold. I think it’s a perfect thing for Toronto, where we have so much diversity. I hope we can get to a place where we can all say, “Well, we love the water, Toronto is growing and we need to explore new opportunities.” I happen to think this is a great one.

Editor’s note: Toronto Life reached out to the New York Times, which provided the following comment on the accuracy of its reporting. “We stand firmly by our story…. The Manchester deal was signed before Toronto, but [Therme] was able to raise external funding for it only after Toronto. As we report, the Toronto contract was a springboard for more recent Therme activity, including fundraising for Manchester and the North American projects cited in our story.”

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.