Blaney See McMurtry. Seer ‘Sheldon Inka D: 416-596-4276 F: 416-594-2602 CONFIDENTIAL sinkol@blaney.com NOT FOR PUBLICATION October 19, 2017 VIA PROCESS SERVER Mr. Patrick Brown, MPP Unit 108 240 Memorial Avenue Orilia, Ontario L3V 74 Dear Mr. Brown’ Re: Notice of Libel No: 090364.0032 416-593-1221 Blaneycom We represent Premier Kathleen Wynne. We previously contacted you by way of letter dated September 13, 2017, with respect to comments you made during a media scrum on September 12, 2017, and which were subsequently repeated by way of broadcast on CHCH Television during its 6:00 p.m. newscast on September 12, 2017, ‘As we explained in our previous letter, your statements during that media scrum were false and defamatory. You have refused to retract or apologize for those defamatory statements, and have made further defamatory statements about Premier Wynne. ‘Accordingly, this letter constitutes @ Notice of Libel Defamatory Statements of September 12, 2017 ‘You made the following defamatory statements during a media scrum on September 12, 2017: First time in Ontario history, when we have to talk about OPP investigations and we have to ask which one the fact that we got a criminal tial in Toronto, you've got these allegations of bribery that go to the heart and the highest part of Kathleen Wynne's organization in Sudbury. Itjust shows how this government continues to cross ethical line after ethical line, The fact thatthe police have been brought in just shows how serious itis. So I hope that the Premier will give us answers, we're not getting them in the legislature, maybe when she stands tra. ‘That in itself is astonishing that we've got @ sitting Premier siting in tril and answering questions about these allegations of bribery. Your statements above are false and defamatory. The express meaning of these statements is that Premier Wynne was on trial for bribery, which was not the case. A further implied meaning of thesestatements is that Premier Wynne is unethical and was under investigation by the police for a criminal act. ‘The express and implied meanings of your statements are false, and you knew or should have known them to be false, Contrary to your statements, Premier Wynne was not and is not under investigation by the police and was not standing trial. At the time you made these statements, Premier Wynne was scheduled to voluntarily testify at the trial of others charged with violating the Election Act, which is not a criminal offence. Your statements are false and misleading and appear to have been made with the intention to harm the reputation of Ms. Wynne. You made these statements to the following members of the Queen's Park ‘media, in addition to others from The Canadian Press, Global, Fairchild and CP24: Robert Benzie, Toronto Star ‘Shawn Jeffords Toronto Sun Mike Crawley, CBC News Rob Ferguson, Toronto Star Martin Regg Cohn, Toronto Star Colin D’Mello, CTV News Hayley Cooper, Newstalk 1010 Pascal Morrissette, TFO Chris Reynolds, QP Briefing Randy Rath, CHCH ‘Alison Smith, Queen’s Park Today Justin Giovannetti, Globe and Mall Julie-Anne Lamoureaux, Radio-Canada ‘As noted above these statements were subsequently repeated by way of broadcast on CHCH Television during its 6:00 p.m. newscast on September 12, 2017. They were also repeated by way of broadcast by CP24, CBC Toronto and CTV Toronto the following day, and republished in a Toronto Star article of ‘September 13, 2017. ‘Since you made these false statements to members of the news media, it was your reasonable expectation that your false statements would be further disseminated. Accordingly, you are also liable for any damage flowing from their republication by CHCH Television, CP24, CBC Toronto, CTV Toronto and the Toronto Star, as well as any and all republications of these statements which have yet to come to our attention. ‘A transcript of the media scrum during which these objectionable remarks were made is enclosed herewith. We direct your attention to your comments at the bottom of page 3, Defamatory Post of September 14, 2017 On September 14, 2017, you posted the following statement to your website at httos:/www.ontariope.ca/statement_from_ontario_pc leader patrick brown on premier wynne s legal t hreats: Statement from Ontario PC Leader Patrick Brown on Premier Wynne's legal threats Posted on September 14, 2017 Yesterday was a sad day for Ontario. No one, whatever their political view, wants to see the Premier of our province debased and humiliated. Regrettably Kathleen Wynne compounded this sorry spectacle with baseless legal threats against me; threats that will be ignored. We as a province need to put this ugly chapter behind us and move on,-3- ‘Your post is false and defamatory. Premier Wynne's legal threat is not baseless. Nor was she “debased and humiliated" by her court attendance in Sudbury In their plain and ordinary meaning, or by their innuendo when considering the context in which the statement was posted, your words meant and were intended to mean that Premier Wynne was standing trial for bribery and had been “debased and humiliated” by the experience. You have published this post falsely and maliciously, and with the intention of further harming Premier Wynne's reputation, Despite the falsity of your post, as of October 16, 2017, it has been “liked” by 92 people and continues to be accessible online to the world at large. It was also republished in a Toronto Star news article that same day. Since you posted this statement to your public website, it was your reasonable expectation that your statement would be further disseminated. Accordingly, you are also liable for any damage flowing from its republication by the Toronto Star and others. Further Defamatory Statements of September 14, 2017 You made additional defamatory comments during a media scrum on September 14, 2017. You were specifically asked by reporters why you wouldn't retract your incorrect statement made two days before, at which time you stated that Premier Wynne was on trial. In response, you made the following comments: + "And | think regrettably, Kathleen Wynne compounded the problem by this threat of a lawsuit. And her baseless lawsuit will be ignored.” + "think its important to move on. And her baseless - | repeat, her baseless - legal threats will be ignored." ‘+ ‘Her lawsuit is baseless. And Kathleen Wynne knows that. And she compounded the problem by the threat of this lawsuit.” * "Her threat of a lawsuit is baseless, and will be ignored.” ‘= “Lwill ignore her baseless threat. And itis baseless. I's - it's a sorry spectacle for Ontario to see the siting Premier of Ontario humiliated in this fashion. Debased in this fashion. And she's compounded the problem by - by this threat yesterday.” im saying that the lawsuit is baseless and it will be ignored.” ‘© "I'm dismissing it because it is baseless.” ‘© "The threat is without foundation and so it deserves to be ignored.” © "She compounded the prob - the, this problem by making a baseless legal threat.” © "Yesterday was a sad day for Ontario. And this baseless threat deserves to be ignored.” ‘+ "I'm simply going to ignore baseless legal threats. | think we all know it's baseless, uhm, and it will be ignored." In their plain and ordinary meaning, or by their innuendo when considering the context in which these statements were made, your words meant and were intended to mean that Premier Wynne was standing trial for bribery and had been “debased and humiliated” by the experience. ‘You made these statements falsely and maliciously, and with the intention of further harming Premier ‘Wynne's reputation,Your false and defamatory statements were further disseminated in a Canadian Press article published the same day, during a Global Television News broadcast that same day, in a Postmedia News article published on September 15, 2017, during a CHCH Evening News broadcast on September 18, 2017, and by other news outlets. ‘A transcript of the media scrum during which these objectionable remarks were made is enclosed herewith. We direct your attention to your comments throughout. Failure to Mitigate ur letter of September 13, 2017 was intended to provide you with an opportunity to partially mitigate the damage you have done with a retraction, an apology, and an undertaking to refrain from making any further defamatory statements about Premier Wynne. Not only did you refuse to make a retraction or to apologize, you chose to compound the problem by making further defamatory statements. Accordingly, a legal action will now be commenced against you for defamation Your status as Tory leader increases the likelihood that your false statements will be repeated by others, thereby increasing the potential harm to the Premier's reputation. Accordingly, you will be held accountable for any damages arising not only from your own defamatory statements but from their repetition by others, In addition, your stubborn refusal to retract your defamatory statements has exposed you to an award of ‘aggravated and punitive damages. Preservation of Documents: We also give you notice that you must preserve all documents relevant to the issues addressed in this Notice of Libel The law requires you to preserve and not alter any papers, electronic files and other documents. The word “document” is defined very broadly in law. It includes every note, email, memorandum, letter, report and any written or printed piece of paper, and also includes sound recordings, video tapes, fims, photographs, charts, graphs, maps, plans, surveys and any information recorded or stored on a computer or media storage device. Should our client proceed with legal action, the law further requires you to make complete disclosure of all of these documents. If you do not comply, it may result in sanctions imposed by the court and liability in tort for spoliation of evidence or potential evidence, If you or your legal counsel have any questions, please contact me directly. We look forward to the satisfactory resolution ofthis matter. Yours very truly, Blaney McMurtry LLP y ‘Jack B, Siegel idon Inkol Sirs© Hon. Kathleen Wynne Alykhian Velsti, Chief of Staff to the Leader of the OppositionTRANSCRIPT — Patrick Brown PQPS ~ September 12, 2017 MPP: Patrick Brown Media: Benzie, jeffords, CTV, Crawley, Reynolds, Rath, Global, Giovanetti, Fairchild, Ferguson, Morissette, Allison Smith, Regg Cohn, Lamoureux, CP24, Newstalk1010 [START TRANSCRIPT] Benzie: -50,000 jobs is a lot, do you think this is the kind of ammunition that you need to say maybe put the brakes on this Brown: ‘* Well it's encouraging that the FAO has said the exact same thing that we have been saying in the legislature * That I've been saying around the province ‘This rushed plan was about helping low-income, vulnerable workers * Now we hear not only from the chamber of commerce that said it could be potentially as high as 185,000 jobs lost in Ontario + Kathleen Wynne’s job killing plan * Now you have the FAO saying that at a minimum you're looking at 50,000 jobs lost * And this will hurt, particularly low-income vulnerable workers + I think what I would like to see is a level of reasonableness * When you hear small businesses saying they need time to comply when you have major organizations like the chamber and the FAO wondering why there is no cost benefit analysis * Why does it always have to be the premiers’ way or the highway? + Why does it have to be dictated on partisan timelines + You look in BC, even the new socialist government in British Columbia saying there needs to be an implementation period + So just being reasonable is what I expect the government to be and unfortunately they're focused on an election time table not on protecting jobs Benzie: Now they have a majority so the 148 part of the minimum wage will rise on January 1%, there's not - | don't think the NDP is going to oppose it and you guys may or may not oppose it | don't know, but regardless it’s going to pass. Looking forward, though, to past 2019, would you guys — if you're in goverment, would you slow the implementation so maybe you could do what the NDP government in BC has done, slow it to the year after that, or perhaps 2021? Brown + Letme be very clear I support a 15$ minimum wageI don't think anyone can live on 11 dollars an hour We do need to have a living wage But | think it’s about how we get there ‘What | would like to see is a more reasonable implementation period That gives notice to our job creators ‘And you're right; the 14 dollars will already be a reality But I think it's important to work in a collaborative fashion to have a implementation period that is reasonable ‘And so we could do two things 1 we are going to get to a 15 dollar minimum wage but we will do it in a fashion that doesn't kill those jobs When the FAO is saying 50,000 hardworking Ontarians are going to lose their jobs And the chamber of commerce is saying the same thing, that jobs will be lost across the province We need to listen to our job creators, our small businesses to do this in a fashion that protects jobs, that also gets us a $15 minimum wage That jobs will be lost around the province We need to listen to our job creators, our small businesses to do this in a fashion that protects jobs, that also gets us a $15 minimum wage Rath: $14 an hour if you got elected? Brown: Listen, the $14 is already going to be implemented, what I'd like to see is that um what is implemented is done in a fashion that there's a proper implementation period That is reasonable, that we pay attention to the concerns raised by FAO and the Chambers of Commerce about the massive job losses that will happen in Ontario And | have to say, i's disappointing that when you have two major reports saying that there will be job losses, significant job losses in Ontario; the Premier continues to ignore that for partisan purposes Reporter: But what year, what implementation do you support by 2021? Brown: Well |, | want to work with the Chambers, work with our small businesses to have implementation period that is reasonable, there's a longer period in British Columbia and that's by a left-wing government in British Columbia | think everyone in Canada is saying there has to be an implementation period, right now Ontario is the only one saying, “That's not the case” I'l mention what John Manley said, John Manley, former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister, Finance Minister; his advice to Kathleen Wynne was, "We're not an 2island on our own in the pacific and that you have to have implementation Periods, you have to have a level of reasonableness” + And | agree with John Manley, | agree with the Chambers, | agree with the FAO, that we need to do this in a fashion that does not kill Ontario jobs, | want to keep those jobs here Benzie: So 2021 then do you think? Or 2020? Brown: ‘+ Listen, it needs to be done in a fashion that is collaborative with our businesses * Asslower implementation period is what I support, if you're asking whether we match British Columbia; | think it's premature for that | think what the Chambers are asking for is to sit down and work with them Most businesses | have met said that they can do a $15 minimum wage but they just need a little bit of time to respond to that ‘* So | want to work with them and maybe we can do it faster than British Columbia but it's about not having a Premier's office that i's their way or the highway; that we have to work with our Chambers, we have to work with our small businesses and that's the approach that I'd like to bring in eight months Crawley: Patrick, what's the point you're trying to make by not actually asking about the thing that everyone is asking about, the thing that everybody is talking about, which is the fact that the Premier is going to testify in a bribery trial of one of her closest aides tomorrow? Brown: + The Liberals are using their legislative tricks here to avoid answering these questions, so | brought it up today by mentioning what | couldn't ask. + I mentioned | couldn't ask about Liberal political corruption, | couldn't ask about the allegations on bribery * The Attorney General gets up and they waste the time in the legislature by trying to avoid answering any of the questions on these very serious, serious allegations. ‘+ First time in Ontario history, when we have to talk about OPP investigations and we have to ask which one — the fact that we got a criminal trial in Toronto, you've got these allegations of bribery that go to the heart and the highest part of Kathleen Wynne’s organization in Sudbury. + Itjust shows how this government continues to cross ethical line after ethical line + The fact that the police have been brought in just shows how serious it is * Sol hope that the Premier will give us answers, we're not getting them in the legislature, maybe when she stands trial + That in itself is astonishing that we've got a sitting Premier sitting in trial and answering questions about these allegations of bribery. 3* That in itself is astonishing of how far this government is falling. Benzie: If the Hamilton matter ends up going to court, will you testify? Like, | mean, she's setting precedent that a party leader can testify when political things have come criminal — Brown: * First of all, | disagree. They're two completely different issues. * One, there’s no charges laid, to have — Benzie: No, I'm saying if charges were laid. Brown: * Well, |, uh, listen, I've always been open and accessible and able to answer any questions ‘+ We have cases of people jumping over themselves wanting to run for us, allegations of bribery are very different. Lamoureux: In French perhaps? On the subject of the FAO's report we're talking about 50,000 lost jobs with the planned raise in the minimum wage, what do you have to say about that? Brown: * It's the same thing that | was saying all summer + There are lots of jobs that we could maybe lose in Ontario + This report is the same as the one by the Chamber of Commerce that said that the way in which the government is making this changes will cause job losses in Ontario ‘+ For me | think it's important to have an increase to the minimum wage where we've given warning to our businesses In BC they are doing the same thing but they gave warning to businesses But here in Ontario because there is an election we have a Premier that wants to give no warning to our businesses ‘+ And that’s not a responsible approach Lamoureux: How much time do businesses need to be wamed in advance? Brown: «think that that’s a discussion to have with our business and our jobs [sic] * But in BC its four years and | think that that is a discussion that the government needs to have with our Chambers of Commerce and with our businesses and for some reason that | don't understand the government doesn't want to have that conversationLamoureux: So simply put you've said you're in favour of an increase to the minimum wage but more gradually? Is that it? Brown: © Exactly Lamoureux: And on the crisis in the hospitals the association of hospitals of Ontario who are asking for more funding what do you have to say about that? Brown: «I think that they're correct * Our hospitals need investment and I've made visits to our hospitals and all the time they are very full [occupee] + There are many children who need help and many people including seniors who need help with their health and the hospitals are too full The choice of this government has been to create new bureaucracies New LIHNs the sub-LIHNs And consequently we don't have the funding for our other hospitals We don't have the money for our doctors and nurses [Part 2 — In Progress] Brown: «Rosy in healthcare in Ontario and it isn't + You know they have doubled down administration created these giant new unnecessary LIHNs * Having these healthcare executive paper pushers * And we don't have funds for front line care «The fact that our emergency rooms this summer were overcrowded where you've got frankly hallway medicine is not what you expect in a province like Ontario * And we have to do better + So'l'm glad the hospital association is raising these alarm bells * And | hope that the Premier and Eric Hoskins will listen that we have serious challenges in healthcare in Ontario because of their poor management of our healthcare system Media: And your recommendations would be then? Brown: + That we need to have rather than this growth of administration that the auditor general has pointed out we need those dollars in front line care + We need those dollars in our emergency room caring for families You know the auditor general made a point that in some aspects of healthcare we've got administrative costs that have soared to 39% ‘+ [want to make sure every precious healthcare dollar goes to frontline care 5* We can't have emerges that have become frankly hallway medicine [END TRANSCRIPT]TRANSCRIPT -Patrick Brown PQPS- September 14, 2017 [Excerpt] Media: but you said on Tuesday that she’s standing trial, you know obviously that's not the case, why not just retract the comments and move on? Brown: * You know + Yesterday was a sorry spectacle + And | think regrettably, Kathleen Wynne compounded the problem by this threat of a lawsuit ‘* And her baseless lawsuit will be ignored Benzie: Did you misspeak? | mean you did say that right here in fact - at this spot, you said that she was on trial, um, she says — or her lawyers say, that you're a lawyer and you know that she actually isn’t on trial, so was it just a misstatement on your part? Brown * Well, yesterday was a sorry spectacle * I think it's important to move on * And her baseless — | repeat, her baseless legal threats will be ignored Benzie: It's not baseless if you — **crosstalk** wel if there is a misstatement though, it’s not baseless, right? I mean, Patrick you're a lawyer, you know that. If— ifit was a misstatement, why not just say it was a misstatement. I'm sure no one believes it should go to court. But — Brown * Her lawsuit is baseless * And Kathleen Wynne knows that * And she compounded the problem by the thread of this lawsuit Jones: | just want to clarify what you mean by baseless, you think her saying that your comments were defamatory is baseless. Or her threat that she'll take further legal action is baseless. Because you do know she followed through on that threat with your predecessor. Brown © Her threat of a lawsuit is baseless, and will be ignored Jones: Why do you think it’s baseless? You know she's followed through on this before?Brown + [will ignore her baseless threat «And itis baseless + It's — it’s a sorry spectacle for Ontario to see the sitting Premier of Ontario humiliated in this fashion * Debased in this fashion + And she’s compounded the problem by — by this threat yesterday Media: By calling it baseless, are you just playing legal chicken here? Are you trying to dare her into actually suing you? Brown: I'm saying that the lawsuit is baseless and it will be ignored Media: You know that there's no way it will work its way through courts before the next election, is that why you're just dismissing it? Brown: + I'm dismissing it because its baseless Lamoureux [translated]: Why did you refuse to apologize for what you said about the Premier? Brown [translated]: «The threat is without foundation and so it deserves to be ignored Jones: You stand by what you said then, Patrick, which the statement you made to reporters yesterday was accurate and you stand by it? Brown: ‘* Uh, yesterday was a sorry day for Ontario ‘* And no one wants to see the sitting Premier of Ontario debased and humiliated + Uh, she compounded the prob — the, this problem by making a baseless legal threat * She knows it's baseless and we'll ignore it Lamoureux [translated]: Did you make a mistake? Brown [translated]: + Yesterday was a sad day for Ontario + And this baseless threat deserves to be ignored Media: Do you just resent the fact that she may have written this letter to you as a diversionary tactic right before she went onto the witness stand?Brown’ * Well, certainly I'm sure there's a lot of people who, uh, see it that way * Uhm, !'m simply going to ignore baseless legal threats * I think we all know its baseless, uhm, and it will be ignored