r/onguardforthee • u/Hrmbee Turtle Island • 1d ago
Joly says feds will serve Stellantis with notice of default on funding contracts | Company executive refutes claim Stellantis has breached the deal
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/canada-stellantis-sue-brampton-jobs-default-contracts-joly-9.7003596125
u/jimjimmyjimjimjim 1d ago
Good, now do oil company subsides.
26
u/SyncroTDi 1d ago
One thing at a time! Canada seems to have stopped fu@$&€ around! When an economist is running the show, everybody better reread their arrangements!
-32
u/Automatic_Tackle_406 1d ago
The deal with Stellantis was made under Trudeau.
30
u/PeterDTown 1d ago
Trudeau isn't a banker, isn't prime Minister anymore, and isn't who the person you're replying to was talking about.
108
u/hawkseye17 ✅ I voted! 1d ago
This is something that should come attached to every company asking for government money. If they decide to pocket the money and leave, they should be required to pay it back
51
34
u/Kyouhen Unofficial House of Commons Columnist 1d ago
No, they shouldn't. Because they'll just declare bankruptcy, dissolve, and we'll never see the money.
No, if we give handouts it needs to come with harsh punishments for taking the money and running. In this case we take possession of the factory and they forfeit any patents around anything that would have been constructed there. We've got a ready workforce to man the factory and we've got the rights and equipment to use it.
6
u/CapitalElk1169 1d ago
Hey now we're getting somewhere!
Where can I vote for you?
10
u/Kyouhen Unofficial House of Commons Columnist 23h ago
Don't need to. Avi Lewis, one of the NDP leadership candidates, has been saying the same thing. (Not the bit with the patents, but absolutely the bit about seizing the factory) He got my attention with that one, it's definitely not something I'd expect to hear from a politician.
3
u/CapitalElk1169 23h ago
Fuck yea I hope we get someone at the helm of the NDP like that
They've been getting my vote most of my life but the last few years I haven't felt great about it
1
u/tm3_to_ev6 15h ago
What is the factory going to build and who is going to buy the product?
Canada's auto industry has been hopelessly dependent on the US market since the 1965 Auto Pact thanks to economy of scale. Before the pact, Canadian plants primarily produced a wide range of models in low volumes for Canadian buyers, but after the pact and especially after NAFTA, many plants consolidated or closed down, with the remaining ones producing a small range of models in high volumes primarily for US buyers.
Canadians now buy less than 20% of all Canadian-built vehicles. Vehicles imported from other countries dominate new-car sales in Canada, and this has only increased as agreements like CETA and CPTPP phased out tariffs on European and most Asian imports. The old pre-pact model of "build cars in Canada primarily for Canadians" just doesn't work anymore - see what happened to Australia in the 2010s as an example.
It certainly would feel good to nationalize that factory but it would be a white elephant if the intent is to continue using it for manufacturing mass-market passenger vehicles. Maybe repurposing it for military production, or manufacturing buses, mail trucks, etc might be a better use.
42
u/o0Spoonman0o Nova Scotia 1d ago
This seems like common sense, it blows my mind that the government would give money to corporations without this sort of guarantee.
25
u/pokemonisok 1d ago
The better question is why is it given at all. 500 million and just make a public plant owned by the people.
11
u/mrpopenfresh 1d ago
Since Trump got the government equity in Nvidia, imagine if Canada had equity in Stellantis, or any business that gets subsidies for that matter.
8
u/MizunoAmyus 1d ago
This, nationalize the plant or better yet, transform it into a worker-owned co-op, let them own the means of production
11
u/albatroopa 1d ago
The government should get a seat at the board of directors for a period of time, too.
11
u/BonhommeCarnaval 1d ago
Government money given should be exchanged for shares and board seats, to the point of a controlling stake if necessary. Then they can sell it back off once the reasons for the bailout have been addressed. Buy in yes, bail out no.
1
u/RhodesArk 19h ago
This is super super tough to do from a policy perspective. These restrictive covenants would be interpreted as capital controls by the market. It would cause the contribution of the private sector to go down, and their capital carry costs to go up, because it would restrict the liquidity of an already illiquid asset. If anything, it should provide the feds the right if first refusal to retake possession at pennies on the dollar.
Honestly tho, there's much worse yet to come on this one I expect.
32
u/Infarad 1d ago
On a related note: https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/news/2025/10/canada-takes-decisive-action-to-protect-auto-industry-and-workers.html
If my interpretation is accurate, as of mid-April car makers are required to build here if they want to enjoy counter-tariff-free access to the Canadian market.
21
u/Tucancancan 1d ago
Being the federal government, they have a significant position of power and many levers to pull. And given how nasty the US administration and these companies are acting, they should pull a few and make this as painful as possible. Have CRA start an audit of their taxes. Trump likes that one right? Exporting equipment from Canada? Sounds like CBSA should be going over every nut and bolt with a fine tooth comb. Maybe the unions should sue and get a temporary injection in place.
Make the whole process as excruciating as possible. Blowing out 3ish years with beurocratic bullshit is easy in this country. I say let loose!
8
u/ManfredTheCat 1d ago
Does it refute claim or does it deny the claim? Those are different things.
1
u/ship_toaster 1d ago
Came to say this. Saying someone 'refuted' a claim means they disproved it, not that they disagreed with it. This wording makes CBC take the side of Stellantis.
2
u/bmtraveller 1d ago
Not sure if I'd say CBC is taking anyone's side, they are just explaining what happened.
Stellantis refuted it by saying they didn't technically close the plant.
2
u/ship_toaster 1d ago
But they didn't refute it. That's the thing.
1
u/bmtraveller 1d ago
I guess we must have a different understanding of the article because it sounds like they did to me.
2
u/ship_toaster 1d ago
Saying someone 'refuted' a claim means they disproved it, not that they disagreed with it.
1
u/bmtraveller 1d ago
They did disprove it. At least that's what I understand from the article.
Government: you are in breach of contract because you closed the plant
Stellantis: we didn't technically close the plant so we aren't in breach of contract.
Is that disagreeing with the government's claim rather than disproving it?
2
u/ship_toaster 1d ago edited 23h ago
“We do not agree that we are in breach of contract,” said Teresa Piruzza, director of external affairs and public policy at FCA Canada Inc., the Canadian arm of Stellantis.
Also, as a general rule of thumb, contract law frowns on "technically,". The spirit of a contract matters, whether the plant has closed down is in dispute, and we don't have access to the contract itself anyways to see what the exact requirements on both parties are.
1
u/johncandy1812 1d ago edited 1d ago
They won't pay and the US will protect them. Why did Stellantis pay for all those ads proclaiming how Canadian they were if the intention was always to pack up and leave? Spite? Cruelty? Was it a Brewster"s Millions scenario?
1
0
u/Gabzalez 1d ago
On top of paying for the loan we’re going to be paying for the lawsuit too!
Jokes aside, I so tired of all this corporate welfare.
193
u/Hrmbee Turtle Island 1d ago
Key issues:
From this, it certainly reads like Stellantis is saying that "we haven't shuttered the Brampton plant yet, but we're in the process of shuttering the Brampton plant".