Absolutely. I think that's what our goal is, but what I'm trying to establish here is that, even at the municipal level, there is an understanding that you have to balance transparency and accountability, again, with protecting the interests, whether it's the corporation, the City of Windsor or Canada, the country of Canada. I think it's really important for us to understand that, because it's a part of the discussion that I think has been left out.
If you look at the Ontario.ca website, the Government of Ontario website, you see a subheading titled “Balancing transparency and confidentiality”. This is provincial. It says there:
As discussed previously in this chapter, it is a good practice to conduct business in a transparent and accountable manner and that municipal meetings be open to the public, subject to certain exceptions.
In other words, municipalities are encouraged to consider openness and transparency to be appropriate in most circumstances, including when making decisions about whether or not to close a meeting.
Then it goes on to say, and this is important:
There will be times, however, in the course of business where information should, or even must, be kept confidential.
Here you have the Province of Ontario, the provincial government, talking about the need to balance those two competing interests.
Then it goes on to say, under the headline “Closing a meeting”:
A meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered is....
It actually spells out what the issues are that are grounds for closed meetings or confidentiality. The first one is “the security of the property of the municipality or local board”. The second one is “personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees”.
I would say that one of the concerns of looking at these contracts of these companies is that we want to make sure we're protecting certain sensitive information on “personal matters about an identifiable individual”. I think we have to be very careful to safeguard that important information.
It goes on to list “a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board”. A couple of things are pertinent here. It's what I mentioned before. Even for something as small as a parking lot worth $50,000, the city would go in camera to discuss it, even on an issue as seemingly trivial as the disposition of a $50,000 parking lot. Again, there are grounds and justification in the Municipal Act of Ontario for exactly that.
When you're talking about this agreement with the contract, you have to also be aware that the City of Windsor is very much a partner to this agreement with Stellantis and LG. The City of Windsor and my council colleagues there, past and present, made a very bold move when the City of Windsor decided to put significant resources into the deal and the agreement. The City of Windsor is absolutely a player in this. They are the ones that assembled the land.
It needs to be emphasized that it was the City of Windsor that assembled the land for that battery plant. They absolutely are a partner to this agreement, so we have to be careful also to make sure that, in that contract, there is not information that not only would in any way be injurious obviously to NextStar or to workers, but that also would in any way disclose information that is sensitive information that the City of Windsor might consider important as well.
Those are the things we have to look at.
The Government of Ontario goes on to say that other grounds for confidential meetings are “labour relations or employee negotiations”. Again, that is something that is important too.
Another point is “litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality or local board”. Next is “advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including—