Industry Committee on Nov. 21st, 2023

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm no expert. However, I did read the Volkswagen contract signed between Volkswagen and the Government of Canada. As I understood it, there is a requirement under other laws in Canada that the commercial sensitivity of a contract be considered.

In the case of Volkswagen, the commercial sensitivities aren't determined by the government but by the other signatory, and I think the same precedent should apply when reviewing the Stellantis contract. It is not for the government to determine the commercial sensitivity of the contract, but for Stellantis to do so.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

I have Mr. Williams.

[Ryan Williams, Conservative, Bay of Quinte, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We were all part of this committee when we looked at the Volkswagen contract. I understand what Mr. Turnbull is trying to do, but when we got in there, there were only two pieces that were redacted and they were really minor. Those documents could have been provided publicly, because we didn't see anything that the public couldn't see. Everything was spoken about. I think we even asked several times afterwards to get those documents in public, because what we saw was nothing that wasn't already out there.

At the same time, for this one, the government could provide these documents and provide those same redactions on production and on workers, but it's not going to stop it publicly, according to officials that we have had in this committee.... Also, we have asked the witnesses to come here publicly to give those same numbers. I think this allows this committee and the public to see exactly what's in there. If there are redactions that we have questions on, there can be other motions made to look at those documents, in the same instance, I think, that Mr. Turnbull has asked for.

We have to have all these instances become public, because this is all public knowledge at this point. This is on the front page of The Globe and Mail today. When we're looking at what we need to have for this committee to go forward, I think, as Mr. Masse has stated from Windsor West, we need to ensure that we get the information publicly. We need a public meeting so that all the Canadians who are reading this today—I don't know how many people read The Globe and Mail right now, but I'm sure it's over a couple of million still—get the answers they are looking for, Mr. Chair.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you.

I have Mr. Perkins.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I think if millions were reading The Globe and Mail, they wouldn't need a subsidy from the federal government, but I'll leave that.

Mr. Chair, thank you.

Mr. Turnbull, on the process issue that we went through last time, what happened in this process is that there was a construction contract with Stellantis before the IRA. After the IRA, a deal was signed for a construction contract, and there was a separate contract for Volkswagen. The second contract dealt with the IRA response and the first contract dealt with the similar construction thing on that. There were two contracts, Mr. Chair, that we wanted to see, and we saw both of them.

There was very little redacted, and the clause that struck me in the contract—and I don't think this is sharing any confidences—said that the government, before releasing the contract—which meant that the government could release the contract—had to ask the partner which clauses they felt were confidentially sensitive. It was not what the government felt was confidentially sensitive.

I'm presuming that those are the same clauses that might be in the Stellantis contract. I'm sure the government can comment on that.

As my colleague Mr. Williams said, most of the things, such as the amount of the subsidy every year that's stated in the contract, are actually lifted straight from the IRA. That part of it is public, and the Parliamentary Budget Officer has spoken to it.

Although I've read them in the Volkswagen contract, what we haven't seen are the conditions around job creation and how many jobs there will be. The terms of those jobs and what the exemptions were for not meeting those commitments were in the Volkswagen contract.

It's hard to question the officials from the company or the minister or other officials as to whether or not they're complying with a contract that we can't talk about publicly, and that's why we believe that the contract, which I would expect would have a couple of redactions from the partner—not from the government, but from the Stellantis partner—would be fine to be released so that we can deal with it.

Volkswagen did not redact the issues around job conditions in the contract that we saw.

I'll leave it there, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Perkins.

I have MP Sorbara.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Chair, through you, I just have a point of clarification to my honourable colleagues on the other side of this table.

Can you just answer this for me? When we sit on committees we can either be public, as we are now, or we can go in camera to discuss certain things and make decisions to a certain extent and see things, and then there's a point of redacted and unredacted documents in general.

When you go in camera, you may see redacted or unredacted documents, depending on the nature of the situation. I wasn't here when you folks looked at the Volkswagen documents. I'm assuming it was done in camera.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

It wasn't done in committee.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

It wasn't done in the committee, but there were redactions on the documents that you saw.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Correct.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Are you saying that you would now want to have that same process where you were...?

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Mr. Perkins, you can respond.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I wouldn't ask the government to break the terms of the contract on the role of the partner, in this case Stellantis, on the commercial sensitivity elements that they could choose or not choose to release publicly.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

I know Mr. Williams made an intervention and I was just following along on that. I wasn't sure if I understood what the ask was in terms of redacted documents in camera, or not in camera.... I just wanted to clarify what the ask was on your side.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you.

Mr. Van Bynen, you have the floor. Then it will be Mr. Turnbull's turn.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I was part of the group that had an opportunity to look at the other contract, the earlier contract.

I guess it's not what we think is important; it's what the other party thinks is important and confidential. My concern is on how we determine what that is. Are we going to approach the other party, and they would redact it? I think we need to respect that.

This also comes back to this notion I had raised earlier around tone. We really don't want to be a hostile environment and we really don't want people who are interested in investing in us not to see this as a favourable economic environment where we work together to find solutions. It's important that we respect those commercial confidential factors, and how we go about doing that, I think, is quite critical.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Van Bynen.

Mr. Turnbull, you have the floor.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I wanted to clarify as well.

Your original motion called for the committee to order the full unredacted contract. I think my colleague Mr. Sorbara made a good point: He clarified that unredacted copies that you can see in camera, or in a room, are very different from redacted copies that you'd see in public. I'm just wondering whether your original motion is calling for something that, to me, can't happen, which is full unredacted contracts in committee.

What I'm asking is.... If they're viewed in public, they will have to be redacted. We were trying to offer you the opportunity to see the least redactions possible in camera, so that you could get answers to your questions. That's a good-faith effort. There would still be some redactions, of course, but there would be fewer than what you'd get if you had a redacted copy in public.

I'm just clarifying. I think we've had a good conversation about this, but we were trying to offer more. If you want these contracts in public, they're going to have to be more heavily redacted. We know there are some limitations to what can be out there that's commercially sensitive, so we have to be responsible about this with the tone that Mr. Van Bynen talked about.

I just want to clarify what you're actually looking for here. Would you accept a public version that's redacted?

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

I'll go to Mr. Perkins for a response.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

That's a good question, Mr. Turnbull.

What we're trying to do is get the most unredacted copy, I guess. In a perfect world, there would be no redacted copy. I'm assuming, since the minister said these contracts are similar, that it's up to the company, not the government, to contractually choose what is redacted or not. I think it's a little presumptuous to say that you think the company would choose to redact more than what we said.

It may be that the company is willing to let all of it go out. We don't know that. That's the choice of the partner. We would like the public document as per the terms, probably, of the contract, so it's up to Stellantis to choose what's public or not, and not the government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

I understand that maybe we're making progress, but in any event, there's an amendment that is already on the floor presented by Mr. Turnbull. I understand it has been circulated to all members by the clerk, so I would like us to rein in the discussion on this.

Go ahead, Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I'm not discounting the fact that there are some unknowns in terms of how much a company will want redacted. I totally agree that it may be a factor we don't have control over, but there are some obligations, I would think, for us to have some redactions in those contracts as well.

Either way, what are we really looking for here? I would be interested to hear from other colleagues around the table on where they stand on this. I think it's important to ensure that we're not committing to revealing more information than a company would want. I think we can all acknowledge that we don't want to commit to an unredacted version, which is what the Conservatives had in their original motion. I think we can all agree that it's not appropriate, given the fact that you've already admitted that the companies themselves will want redactions. Even if we don't know exactly how much they'll want redacted, we know that they'll want some redactions. That's pretty consistent with past discussions and agreements at this committee, as I understand it.

I would be interested to know what my other colleagues from the NDP and the Bloc think about the proposal I've put forward, in order to see where they stand.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, MP Turnbull.

Before I yield the floor to MP Masse online, I will just note for the benefit of members that I have been informed by the clerk that we have resources until 7:52 p.m. That doesn't mean we need to use them, but they are there.

Mr. Masse, the floor is yours.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be quick.

I do appreciate what I think is Mr. Turnbull's sincere approach in terms of dealing with sensitive information, but I think what Mr. Perkins played out was about right in terms of where we're at. I've been consistently on the record for a national auto policy that's transparent, believing that the workers and the investment are worthwhile.

I understand where this is coming from, but I can't support it for those reasons.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Masse.

Are there any further comments on Mr. Turnbull's proposed amendment? If there are none, I'll have to—

Mr. Turnbull, you have the floor.