Government Never Forgets: GM to Pay Back Cash That Funded Celebrity, Cutlass Ciera Production

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

A bill for the assembly of two decades-old models — one from a defunct marque — will come due on April 1. And unlike much of the debts written off during General Motors’ bankruptcy, a major subsidiary now has to pay this chunk back.

The money, $220 million in all, was handed to GM Canada back in 1987 to save the Montreal-area Sainte-Thérèse Assembly plant. GM Canada used that bankroll to build the stunningly sexy Chevrolet Celebrity and Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera. It later cranked out the last Pontiac Firebirds and fourth-generation Chevrolet Camaros.

The thing about 30-year interest-free loans is that someone eventually comes to collect.

Unlike its parent company, outstanding loans held by GM Canada prior to 2009 are still active. During GM’s bankruptcy, its Canadian division slashed its workforce and dealer network in a desperate effort to reduce costs. Things improved, but media north of the border soon began asking questions about taxpayer cash handed out long ago.

GM Canada still intended to repay the $220 million offered up by the Canadian and Quebec government, the company said in 2011. The plant, of course, no longer existed, having been torn down and the land since turned into a big-box retail mall.

Sainte-Thérèse Assembly opened in 1965, building Chevrolet Biscaynes before moving on to H- and G-body vehicles in the 1970s and ’80s. When poor quality and labor strife threatened to shutter the facility, the federal and provincial government intervened. Each offered $110 million. It was then decided the plant should be retooled to build Chevrolet Celebrity and Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera models. After that, another reprieve — Camaro and Firebird production ran from 1993 to 2002.

After that, GM left Quebec.

Following the most recent round of labor negotiations, GM pledged $554 million for its Canadian operations. While the possibility of government cash arose, last month GM said it wasn’t necessary for the projects it had in mind. While discussing the matter with the Globe and Mail, GM Canada president Stephen Carlisle claimed the company would indeed pay back the loan on its due date — April 1, 2017.

The payment comes at an opportune time for Canada, which just pledged an interest-free loan to another crucial Montreal-area business apparently in need of propping up.

(While editing this piece, Steph asked, “Oh, can you add the adjective ‘stunningly sexy’ before the first mention of Cutlass Ciera?” I was happy to oblige. —Mark)

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 31 comments
  • Jagboi Jagboi on Mar 02, 2017

    My dad bought a Ciera new in 83. For it's time, it was a good car. We never had reliability problems with it, but it did like to eat front brakes. Gave great gas mileage too, one highway trip we averaged 39 mpg with the 2.8 V6. Speed limit was 90 km/h which helped, but it was always an economical car to drive.

  • CobraJet CobraJet on Mar 02, 2017

    I had a string of three of these Cutlass's as company cars An 85, 88, and 90. The 88 was the same color as the coupe pictured. The 88 was the best one of all. It was outfitted with handling suspension, aluminium wheels, and the 3.8 V6. It would smoke the front tires.

  • Tassos Under incompetent, affirmative action hire Mary Barra, GM has been shooting itself in the foot on a daily basis.Whether the Malibu cancellation has been one of these shootings is NOT obvious at all.GM should be run as a PROFITABLE BUSINESS and NOT as an outfit that satisfies everybody and his mother in law's pet preferences.IF the Malibu was UNPROFITABLE, it SHOULD be canceled.More generally, if its SEGMENT is Unprofitable, and HALF the makers cancel their midsize sedans, not only will it lead to the SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST ones, but the survivors will obviously be more profitable if the LOSERS were kept being produced and the SMALL PIE of midsize sedans would yield slim pickings for every participant.SO NO, I APPROVE of the demise of the unprofitable Malibu, and hope Nissan does the same to the Altima, Hyundai with the SOnata, Mazda with the Mazda 6, and as many others as it takes to make the REMAINING players, like the Excellent, sporty Accord and the Bulletproof Reliable, cheap to maintain CAMRY, more profitable and affordable.
  • GregLocock Car companies can only really sell cars that people who are new car buyers will pay a profitable price for. As it turns out fewer and fewer new car buyers want sedans. Large sedans can be nice to drive, certainly, but the number of new car buyers (the only ones that matter in this discussion) are prepared to sacrifice steering and handling for more obvious things like passenger and cargo space, or even some attempt at off roading. We know US new car buyers don't really care about handling because they fell for FWD in large cars.
  • Slavuta Why is everybody sweating? Like sedans? - go buy one. Better - 2. Let CRV/RAV rust on the dealer lot. I have 3 sedans on the driveway. My neighbor - 2. Neighbors on each of our other side - 8 SUVs.
  • Theflyersfan With sedans, especially, I wonder how many of those sales are to rental fleets. With the exception of the Civic and Accord, there are still rows of sedans mixed in with the RAV4s at every airport rental lot. I doubt the breakdown in sales is publicly published, so who knows... GM isn't out of the sedan business - Cadillac exists and I can't believe I'm typing this but they are actually decent - and I think they are making a huge mistake, especially if there's an extended oil price hike (cough...Iran...cough) and people want smaller and hybrids. But if one is only tied to the quarterly shareholder reports and not trends and the big picture, bad decisions like this get made.
  • Wjtinfwb Not proud of what Stellantis is rolling out?
Next