The answer usually provided was "yes, your program has bugs" to which people objected theoretically. "Look, we found a bug." "My theory says you didn't." Followed quickly by the prize winning "that's not a bug."
Yeah, the truth is the methods companies use to find their bugs currently won't be able to give a definitive "no" anyway. The answers are really "yes, you have bugs" or "maybe you have bugs but we can't find any", which is true no matter how you coded. Static analysis would be another tool just like peer review or unit tests. I wonder if you could bring it up that way...
Call me crazy, but I love it when a person or machine admits "I don't know" -- doubly so if they distinguish between "it's not possible to know" and "we simply haven't handled that case yet". That can be extremely useful information to have!