Government Operations Committee on Nov. 25th, 2025

[Philip Jennings]

I didn't discuss this contract with my predecessor, but certain things were put in place within my department. I'm sure that, when contracts are signed, even if people change jobs or positions, the provisions of the contract remain and the history isn't lost. That enables us to continue to manage the contract properly.

Stéphanie Tanton's team is in place. If the people who negotiated this contract are no longer in office, they will have passed on the necessary information to the people replacing them, so that they are able to properly manage—

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

That's good.

[Philip Jennings]

That's what I expect.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

In light of the provisions that brought us here today, I imagine you'll make recommendations te ensure that this situation doesn't happen again—that is to say, to ensure that this kind of a player can't have the upper hand. We're being treated with disdain, and I can't believe it.

Unless someone wants to hide something or is in cahoots—I won't go there—it is extremely important for businesses to know that they are not in charge. They're getting millions, if not billions, of dollars.

Mr. Chair, once you have the new wording of the provisions, I'd like to know so that we can avoid wasting time.

Mr. Jennings, it's not that I don't like you appearing before the committee, but everyone's time is precious.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks for adding that little bit at the end.

We'll go to Mrs. Jansen and then Ms. Khalid.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Thank you very much.

I don't know if Mr. Bédard can answer this question.

If it would appear that Stellantis is breaking the agreement by moving to the U.S., do they have any right to continue to demand the commercially confidential part of the agreement, or would it suggest, if they can move, that it's within their rights to leave based on the contract?

[Michel Bédard]

We looked at the contract in terms of potential confidentiality of information in terms of the clauses, so I'm not in a position to answer your question.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Okay. I'll ask Stephanie.

It appears that Stellantis is breaking the agreement by moving to the U.S. Would they continue to have the right to demand commercial confidentiality?

[Stephanie Tanton]

In the agreement, there is a resolution process. Currently, and as I think the minister indicated in the INDU committee on November 3, we have entered into the resolution process with the company to determine whether or not there is a breach.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Okay. I have another question.

We've admitted that the department is using boilerplate contracts and that they don't bring legal counsel to the table when they're actually in the business of negotiating a contract, a $15-billion contract, which is something I can't imagine happening in the private sector.

Stellantis is moving their plant to the U.S. It would appear that the boilerplate contract you're using isn't really equipped to ensure things like a jobs guarantee, clawbacks and so forth. Would you agree?

[Stephanie Tanton]

I did not say we use a boilerplate. I said that we have a template—

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

I believe that Mr. Jennings did, perhaps.

[Stephanie Tanton]

We have a template agreement, and then we negotiate very significant portions of these agreements, including the benefit agreements, including the financial provisions, on a case-by-case basis.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

You do have lawyers in the room, then.

[Stephanie Tanton]

The benefit agreements in this agreement would have been negotiated specifically with Stellantis to reflect the project itself. Those are not boilerplates.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

You would have a lawyer in the room when you were speaking with Stellantis on this particular thing. You would have a lawyer sitting beside you—which would be normal for any other private company to have lawyers in the room—when you were making these negotiations because they're going to see those details.

[Stephanie Tanton]

We do not have legal sitting with us in every conversation we have with the company during the negotiation and as we work towards a final agreement, no.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Okay. We've clearly established from the law clerk—thank you very much—that this is within our parliamentary rights to see these unredacted documents, yet somehow, you believe that nine of us MPs can't see those unredacted documents in a closed-door meeting. We're not asking to put this out into the public.

Are you concerned at all that people watching this may see this as a cover-up by the government?

[Philip Jennings]

Just to be clear, once again, I've suggested a past practice, which I think carefully balances the needs of a parliamentary committee with the commercial confidentiality clauses that we signed with companies. I suggested to this committee that we follow the same process, which is essentially to make sure that we work with the company in terms of understanding what should be redacted, in terms of a document, and that we share that in closed doors.

In past parliamentary committees, they've agreed to that process. This committee may not, but that is the best practice of finding the right balance.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

However, based on the redactions, I just don't see how we, as parliamentarians, can determine whether or not we have any leverage as government in regard to timelines or job guarantees or anything like that. I don't see how we have that with the way you have done these redactions.

[Philip Jennings]

The work we did with Stellantis was about trying to minimize how many things were redacted. You mentioned jobs just now. That has not been redacted. The covenants related to closures were not redacted. These are elements that you could argue are commercially confidential, but the company is willing to share it with this committee in a spirit of openness on this.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

However, the wording that's used—and I have no idea what I'm allowed to say—is so airy-fairy out there that it could be decided to Stellantis's good pretty much every time, based on what I've read.

[Philip Jennings]

I'm sorry, but I'm not quite clear as to the question.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

The wording in this contract that you guys have—and again, I don't know whether I'm allowed to use any of the wording—is so general. It would be just so easy for Stellantis to argue for themselves.

[Philip Jennings]

It certainly respects what we think.... With each company, they're looking to protect what's commercially confidential, for us to be able to do due diligence.