Evidence of meeting #20 for Industry and Technology in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was read.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Liberal
Sima Acan Liberal Oakville West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll ask one question and then I'll share my time with Madame O'Rourke.
Minister, I remember back in 2009 watching the news nervously. As everybody remembers, the Harper government gave $14 billion of taxpayer money as a support to GM and Chrysler. There were 4,000 jobs lost at GM in both facilities in Oshawa and Windsor, 2,000 to 3,000 jobs in Chrysler and many other thousands of jobs in the supply chain. When the Harper government bailed out GM and Chrysler with no strings attached and no job guarantees, it ultimately led to plant closures as well, both in Oshawa and Windsor.
Speaking of those, what lessons did the government learn when we were negotiating these contracts?
December 10th, 2025 / 5:20 p.m.
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Thank you for asking the question.
Canadians can judge for themselves. When you have a contract...and I'm happy because....
Colleagues, I've referred to one particular agreement. For those watching at home, if you want to have the full agreement...because there are different agreements. There are a lot of assertions being made here without having legal counsel providing counsel on what is being said.
If you look at the contract, the benefit commitments—for the people watching at home—make up over four pages of undertakings that the company has. They're not only with respect to jobs, which we're obviously going to fight for. They're also with respect to a number of undertakings in R and D investment in Canada, capital expenditure in Canada, making sure that we reduce the environmental impacts, the creation of an environmental sustainability plan and a supply chain in Canada, and limiting the work they can do outside of Canada—we have even guarantors for that.
Over time, the legal profession has evolved in terms of providing the set of tools that you need in the tool box to protect. What I want to stress to people watching at home is that these agreements have undertakings for more than a decade. This agreement is much more solid than what would have been done in the past with respect to that. Not only do you have to read this agreement—which I've tried to explain to my colleagues, if they want to go to the bottom of this—but you have to read the special contribution agreement with NextStar and understand the interaction between these contracts. That's where you have the full view of the contractual undertakings that were taken by Stellantis and its affiliates.
That's what I was trying to help colleagues better understand, because I served at the time and led the negotiation and, therefore, understand the interaction. I was there at the time. That's why I say that before people jump to conclusions, they really have to read these contracts together.
In what we've done with the officials, I think we have solid protection. That's why, as I said, what we have seen from Stellantis is unacceptable. I understand that there's an intention to provide a notice of default. There are very strong provisions to defend the commitments that were made.
Yes, during the negotiations, there were a lot of interaction with the workers and with the company to make sure that we would, at the time, have the best possible deal to protect the Brampton and Windsor facilities, get a battery plant and, at the same time, have a number of provisions that would guide us with respect to the disbursement. What colleagues don't want to hear when they talk about billions—this is why I brought the public accounts of Canada, and this is good for Canadians to know—is that $40 million has been disbursed under the special contribution agreement. The public accounts are very clear on that.
There are a lot of precedent conditions that need to be met before other amounts are disbursed. That's why I'm saying that I feel, under the circumstances and the negotiations we had, and with the investments we were able to attract to the country, considering the time.... You have to go back to 2023. Everyone was fighting to get these investments in their country; it was between us and the United States.
Look at the record. Don't take it from me. Bloomberg said we were ahead of China in building a supply chain. It's not me who said that; it was Bloomberg.
At some stage, with the benefit of hindsight.... I hear a lot of comments today from people who might not have been negotiating at the time, but I can tell you that when we stood and announced these investments, we were with the workers, the unions and the company, because we expected the company to fulfill all of its contractual obligations.
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
The minister repeatedly said we should read the contracts and we should have the opportunity to read the contracts. I want to know if the minister is suggesting now that we should get unredacted copies of the contracts so that we can read them. It seems to me that's what he's suggesting.
Conservative
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
I'll bring a redacted copy, sir. I have the same one that you have.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Mr. Seeback, I'm not sure that would be classified as a point of order.
However, the good news, colleagues, as we come to the end of our time together formally, is that in the lovely exchanges of good wishes that I'm sure all members will have once I gavel out, there will be an opportunity for members to ask questions.
I want to say just before we break, in the spirit of what Monsieur Ste-Marie said earlier, that I had the opportunity in the chamber earlier to draw reference to my father. One of the things I said was a really important lesson he taught me early, which is that those with whom we disagree and see the world differently from are not our enemies; they're our opposition. I think it's really important at this time of the year when we go home to our families and our friends and our loved ones that we remind ourselves of that and remember that we are sent here by Canadians in the spirit of democracy, which we all love dearly, both to be tough on each other and to do so in service of Canadians. I know all members know that.
As Chair, I want to take the opportunity to thank all of you for your contributions to the country, and all the staff, our analysts, our clerk and those who support us. I hope everybody has a wonderful holiday season, and we will see you back here in the new year.
The meeting is adjourned.