Evidence of meeting #97 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was apple.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Regional Counsel, Canada and Latin America, Apple Canada Inc.
The decision is made on a global basis, and the price is a Canadian price. I believe it's $29 U.S., so we have $35 Canadian, and it's applied equally around the world.
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Okay.
With regard to moving forward, will Canadian consumers get reciprocity should Apple change its policies related to reimbursement or compensation with the court cases in the United States, Spain, France, and South Korea? Will Canadians receive the same treatment and immediately as those other countries undergo their separate investigations of Apple?
4:50 p.m.
Counsel, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, Apple Canada Inc.
Mr. Masse, thank you very much. This gives me an opportunity to speak as the lawyer here.
With respect, I think it's not appropriate to ask a company to decide in advance what to do about a result or a settlement that is unknown, in future, in an unknown country, and that you just wait to see—
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
With all due respect, you're our witness here, and our chair will decide what's appropriate or not appropriate—
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I believe it's a fair question to ask whether or not Canadians are going to receive the same reciprocal treatment. I thought it would be a policy of Apple's.
Apparently there seems to be something with the $35, and that being matched, as you mentioned, with regard to American pricing. I want to make sure, though, that Canadian consumers are going to get the same.
Should Apple change and wipe out the $35, are Canadian consumers, for example, going to get the same thing? That seems like a policy decision by Apple.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
Mr. Masse, we're way over on your time.
We can't force the witness to answer. He's given his answer. You can try again when you come back to it, but we are going to move on.
Mr. Erskine-Smith, you have five minutes.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Thanks very much.
Thanks to the witness.
Apple successfully reduced the occurrence of unexpected shutdowns but slowed down launch times and performance. Now, today you've strangely said that Apple did nothing wrong, but the issue is disclosure, and Apple apologized for non-disclosure in relation to the slowed performance.
Was the non-disclosure intentional or inadvertent?
4:50 p.m.
Regional Counsel, Canada and Latin America, Apple Canada Inc.
We don't think that we miscommunicated anything at any time. What we originally said was—
4:55 p.m.
Regional Counsel, Canada and Latin America, Apple Canada Inc.
We apologized because our consumers were not hearing directly from us. Our consumers are the people who are relying on Apple to provide the information to them. There was a lot of noise in the media, and we wanted to make it very clear, so we apologized that we hadn't reached out sooner—
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
So you think you disclosed to consumers the slowed performance issue?
4:55 p.m.
Regional Counsel, Canada and Latin America, Apple Canada Inc.
No. No, our apology was to not communicate with them directly.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
For non-disclosure, right.
Was the non-disclosure in relation to the slow performance intentional or inadvertent?
4:55 p.m.
Regional Counsel, Canada and Latin America, Apple Canada Inc.
We didn't not disclose anything. We didn't have anything to not disclose.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
But the slowed performance of the phone, the very reason you're attending today, that you did not disclose to consumers, was that non-disclosure intentional or inadvertent?
4:55 p.m.
Regional Counsel, Canada and Latin America, Apple Canada Inc.
It was not intentional.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Okay, so if it was not intentional, what I would like is an undertaking for any internal correspondence, advice, or opinions for Apple Canada or its parent U.S. company with respect to whether the slowed performance issue associated with the update should have been disclosed to consumers.
4:55 p.m.
Counsel, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, Apple Canada Inc.
Are you asking for all the legal advice given to Apple?
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
If you deem it to be solicitor-client privilege, so be it, but internal correspondence certainly isn't all solicitor-client privilege. It's any internal correspondence, advice, or opinions that you're able to disclose, absent solicitor-client privilege, for Apple Canada or its parent U.S. company with respect to whether the slowed performance issue associated with the update should be disclosed.
4:55 p.m.
Counsel, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, Apple Canada Inc.
I'm not going to make that undertaking. If the committee wants to make a direction about things, we'll reconsider. But the fact is, as people here know, Apple is exposed to a number of class actions in the United States—
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
You're before a House of Commons committee that has subpoena powers, and you're at risk of contempt of the House not to answer our questions.
4:55 p.m.
Counsel, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, Apple Canada Inc.
I beg your pardon, Ms. Famulak is not here under subpoena—
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
4:55 p.m.
Counsel, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, Apple Canada Inc.
—and if you issued one, it would be a different situation—