Evidence of meeting #20 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was stellantis.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
Good afternoon, everyone.
Welcome to meeting number 20 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.
Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(c), the committee is resuming its study on the response of the government to the motion for the production of papers adopted on October 20 about contracts with Stellantis.
Welcome, Ms. Piruzza. We appreciate your patience.
Bloc
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I'm only hearing English. It isn't even your voice, Mr. Chair.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I just want to make sure that everything's working.
Since you're speaking to me in English, I'll see if the interpretation is working.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
We're also getting feedback. It sounds like English and French are both coming through on the same channel. When I speak, I hear it repeating.
I'm sorry, but we're going to suspend for a few seconds.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
We're back. I'm sorry for that. Thank you for your patience, twice now.
I want to express my thanks to you for joining us in person. We understand there were lots of IT issues the last time. It's relatively common with Zoom, with the committee, so we appreciate that you were able to join us today. I'm sorry you weren't able to join us last week. I want to give special thanks for your patience in putting up with our IT issues.
Colleagues, everybody participating around the table has received the unredacted version of the agreement. The motion was to have it unredacted by email, but industry would only provide it unredacted and printed, so that is what you get. This is confidential. It's not to be shared with anyone—with any staff or with anyone outside—by those who have received it today.
Mr. Gasparro, when you're back in person, you will receive a confidential copy. There may be other members at the table who have not received it and will not receive it in the future. Mr. Seeback, for example, who is here today, received it. The spirit was that it would stay with that one person. The next time we discuss it, if there is a next time, it would be with that MP and not with other MPs.
I would ask today, for any questions you put forward, that you do not read or bring up specific items from the contract. You can obviously ask about it, but don't say, “on page 13, I noticed that the chair of OGGO is to receive Christmas gifts,” etc. Please don't refer to specifics.
We will go ahead with a five-minute opening statement.
Again, thank you for joining us today, and I'm sorry for all the IT issues. I know it was frustrating for you, but I'm glad you could join us today in person.
Please go ahead.
Teresa Piruzza Director, External Affairs and Public Policy, FCA Canada Inc.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Honourable members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
My name is Teresa Piruzza, and I am the director of external affairs for Stellantis Canada.
As you mentioned, I regret that I was unable to participate in last week's meeting, as I had intended—and attempted—to do. I was unable to join for reasons beyond my or Stellantis's control. I was, however, online with parliamentary IT throughout the duration of the meeting, but unfortunately, they were not able to fix the problem. I know you were frustrated by my non-attendance. Believe me that I was frustrated as well.
I hope my letter on Monday made it clear that Stellantis has no objection to members of the committee viewing unredacted versions of the SIF agreement, which I see that you have now received, with appropriate confidentiality safeguards in place. They are safeguards that reflect established parliamentary processes, which will be familiar to the members of the committee.
Stellantis has consistently taken the position that the commercially sensitive information contained in our agreement with the government should remain confidential. After the committee asked the government to provide a copy of the agreement, the government proposed redactions and we agreed to the proposed redactions as appropriate.
We understand and respect the important role of the OGGO committee. That is why we have agreed that the full agreement should be shared with the members in a confidential setting. We hope this will allow you to advance your study while also protecting the confidentiality of Stellantis's commercially sensitive information.
Thank you.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
Thank you.
We'll start our six-minute round with Mrs. Block, please.
The floor is yours.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Thank you, Chair.
Welcome, Ms. Piruzza. It's good to have you join us today.
As you are well aware—because you were watching the committee last week—department officials told us that it was Stellantis that proposed the redactions and outlined why every one of them was necessary. You have now written a letter and, in your opening remarks, claimed that Stellantis never requested for the documents to be redacted.
After this committee ordered the documents to be produced, who initiated the conversation regarding redactions?
Director, External Affairs and Public Policy, FCA Canada Inc.
I can't speak to others' testimony, but I can speak to the context and the process through which the agreements have been shared.
The context is essentially, as I said in my opening remarks, the importance of maintaining the confidentiality of commercially sensitive information. That's the context that overlays, almost like a lens, these agreements. I believe that's an objective that the government shares as well. That's the context that goes over this.
When we were advised that the agreement had been requested, the government provided some redactions, which we reviewed and agreed to—again—given that those redactions reflected our business information.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
How do you square your testimony today with the testimony that we received from ISED when they appeared? I'm going to quote the response that we got: “However, I can say that in our discussions with Stellantis, they outlined to us, for every redaction, why they felt it necessary for it to be protected commercially. We were comfortable with the redactions [that] they proposed.”
That's a little bit different from what you're telling us here today.
Director, External Affairs and Public Policy, FCA Canada Inc.
Again, I can't speak to someone else's testimony to this committee. I can outline, again, the context and the process through which we were engaged. That is how the process went through in terms of the redactions that were proposed and that we reviewed and consented to. Essentially, it was a joint effort in terms of ensuring that our sensitive information is maintained confidential and redacted.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
I'm going to go back to the paragraph in the letter that you sent where you didn't say that this was a joint effort. You said, “To be clear: Stellantis did not propose or suggest any of the redactions applied to the version of the SIF Agreement that the Committee received from ISED.”
Does that sound like it was a joint process and that there was a going back and forth on what would be redacted and what wouldn't be redacted?
Director, External Affairs and Public Policy, FCA Canada Inc.
Again, in terms of the context of the request and the process, the government provided us with a copy of a redacted agreement. We reviewed those redactions and agreed that they protected our information appropriately.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Okay. I'm going to move on to another question.
Did ISED ever suggest sharing the fully unredacted contract with the committee?
Director, External Affairs and Public Policy, FCA Canada Inc.
It goes back to the lens that is always put, both with ourselves and with ISED—that shared objective—to ensure the confidentiality of our business information.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
They never at any point said, “These are parliamentarians. They have a right to see these contracts unredacted. Can we present them to the committee? Would you be comfortable with us presenting them to the committee unredacted?”
Director, External Affairs and Public Policy, FCA Canada Inc.
Our objective is, as Stellantis has continuously maintained, that any review of an agreement must be done in a confidential setting. The protection of the information that's in there is critical.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
I'm just trying to get an answer to the question that I've asked. Did they ever suggest that parliamentarians should receive these contracts unredacted under those circumstances that you've just outlined?
Director, External Affairs and Public Policy, FCA Canada Inc.
We respect OGGO and your privilege in terms of reviewing the agreement. That is why we did propose—and I see that you've now received—the unredacted copies.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
I guess my next question is this: Do you agree with their testimony?
Director, External Affairs and Public Policy, FCA Canada Inc.
I can only speak to my testimony and in terms of the process that I was engaged in.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Okay. Then, in response to the question I asked about ISED ever suggesting that you share the fully unredacted contracts with parliamentarians, I'm going to assume that is a no.
Department officials told us they had back-and-forth conversations with Stellantis about the redactions. Is that correct?