Finance Committee on Oct. 8th, 2026

[Pierre Gratton]

I'd say that the two big issues are the fiscal environment and the regulatory environment, but I would say that we're seeing improvements in both areas now.

On the regulatory side, we are seeing timelines improve through the Impact Assessment Act. There was a project in Quebec that reached a critical milestone a year earlier than the previous project, which is really good news. We now have 10 agreements in place between the federal government and the provinces, which we never thought we'd see. We're heading in the right direction, but without a doubt, the regulatory system has been duplicative historically and very lengthy.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Would you have an idea of how many mining projects are facing a backlog right now or facing delays?

[Pierre Gratton]

What do you mean by “facing delays”?

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

I mean delays for approval.

[Pierre Gratton]

I'd have to look at the agency's website, so no.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

We're increasingly, in this country, talking about critical minerals as a national security asset. Do you think we should maintain a strategic reserve of the key minerals needed for the defence strategy and essential supply chains?

[Pierre Gratton]

Probably at this current point in time there are reasons to do so for a subset of commodities that China, for example, may have a current stranglehold on. There's no question that where there is Chinese dominance, the ability for projects to come online and be competitive is questionable. Instruments that we've started to see deployed in Canada now around offtake agreements, direct investments and stockpiling are tools that I think make sense for certain commodities.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

On that exact frame, a lot of our allies have been raising concerns about the dependence on China for strategic reserves or for their own access to critical minerals. If we had a strategic reserve, could that potentially strengthen our leverage and increase our reliability as a supplier to many of our allies?

[Pierre Gratton]

Yes, I would say so.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Are we currently moving from discovery to production quickly enough to take advantage of the geopolitical opportunities?

[Pierre Gratton]

Historically, no. We've seen our reserves for certain critical minerals decline by as much as 97% over the last 25 years. The exploration into base metals—which are largely what critical minerals are—has not been there for the past 25 to 30 years. We've built more gold mines, which is great because gold is very valuable these days, but we haven't been building critical mineral properties. We need to turn that around. It has compromised, as well, our downstream processing industry. We've closed seven smelters and refineries in the last 10 years. Why? It's because they don't have domestic feed. We definitely need to turn this around.

I am increasingly encouraged by the steps being taken in Bill C-39, which is before Parliament. There are additional measures in there, plus the things I mentioned earlier. We're starting to see improvements at Fisheries and Oceans Canada, which has always been a problem department when it comes to timeliness of decisions, at Transport Canada and, as I mentioned earlier, through the Impact Assessment Act.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Thank you.

I have a question for FP Canada, for either of you.

Oftentimes, financial planners see Canadian households in a very different light than the government does with respect to their finances. What are planners today seeing families dealing with when it comes to mortgage costs, consumer debt and the rising costs of everyday essentials?

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Mr. Guglielmin, I'm sorry. You have gotten to the end of your time.

Oh, it's six minutes. I apologize.

Go ahead.

[Craig MacLennan, National Head, Policy and Government Relations, FP Canada]

What we've seen in the data.... We went back to 2015 to look at all of these microeconomic categories. What we see when we look at Canadians engaged with a financial planner versus non-engaged Canadians is that non-engaged Canadians are accruing a significant amount of debt, almost 38% more than engaged Canadians. We see that Canadians engaged with a financial planner are able to turn a dollar of income into almost two times as much wealth creation.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

I'm going to interject because I have one last question.

Oftentimes, the people who can't afford financial planners are the ones who need them most. Is that the central problem you proposed for the financial planning tax credit? Is that the one you're trying to solve?

[Craig MacLennan]

Yes.

[Tashia Batstone]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

I apologize. I was too quick on the jump there.

Go ahead, Mr. Sawatzky, for six minutes.

[Jake Sawatzky, Liberal, New Westminster—Burnaby—Maillardville, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

Mr. Gratton, thank you so much for being here today.

You mentioned some improvements in timelines. I was wondering if you could elaborate on what you've been seeing recently in terms of the improvement of timelines.

[Pierre Gratton]

The more recent projects that have been entering the assessment process are being better tailored. Tailoring has always been a big issue for us. It means focusing on issues that are unique to a project and not asking for information about every imaginable feature, many of which are common from one mine to the next. We have often questioned why the agency would need this information yet again when it knows from experience what it's looking at.

We have started to see that tailoring in the last couple of years. It took a while. It was one of the promises of the original act, and we didn't see it materialize until the last couple of years. As a result of the tailoring and the agreements between jurisdictions, we are seeing improvements in efficiency.

There's a promise, particularly with the new legislation before Parliament, that we will get to permitting decisions faster. We're hopeful that this will also be the case. Sometimes, such as for a Fisheries Act authorization, it can take two or two and a half years. That's after your impact assessment. If that can be reduced, that will also make a big difference.

[Jake Sawatzky, Liberal, New Westminster—Burnaby—Maillardville, BC]

Of course, time is of the essence when you're talking about these large projects.

You also mentioned flow-through shares in the context of mineral exploration. Could you explain to the committee what flow-through shares are, how they work and how mineral exploration activities will create more jobs and strengthen reliable supply chains?

[Pierre Gratton]

Flow-through shares have been a mechanism for a long time, and for the last 20-some years there has been the METC, or the mineral exploration tax credit. What happens is that a junior exploration company that needs to raise money because they don't have revenue of their own will go to the market and say that they need $3 million to do their next fieldwork. Investors will invest in that project, and in return, they get a credit from the federal government—a tax credit—and possibly from the provincial government as well. Some provinces have supplementary credits and some don't. That's what lures in the investors, and it allows exploration companies to compete against Bitcoin, AI or the things that are dominating risk capital at any given time. Then the explorers have that money, and they're able to do their fieldwork. They're able to employ northerners and indigenous people and hopefully find the next generation of mines that our pipeline needs.

The METC was first established by the government of Jean Chrétien. It's been renewed every year since. Once, under a previous government, it was renewed for five years, and we were delighted, but usually it's an annual renewal. It expires in March 2027. It's not the subject of this bill, but we're certainly hopeful that the government will renew it once again, preferably for another five years.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to say that.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Jake Sawatzky, Liberal, New Westminster—Burnaby—Maillardville, BC]

Yes, of course.

Chair, how much time do I have left?

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

You have two minutes.