International Trade Committee on March 24th, 2026

[Michael Bourque]

We have established markets already. For example, we've been selling potash to China and Southeast Asia for many years. That's a growing market. We'd like to continue to serve it.

As I mentioned earlier, potash production in Canada is growing. We have BHP opening a new mine next year, and Mosaic, Nutrien and K+S, which currently operate in Saskatchewan, are all expanding their operations.

My main message is that we support trade around the world. We will find the markets, but our concern is with the supply chain, and specifically the supply chain infrastructure. All the potash that's produced for export comes from Saskatchewan, and it needs to travel a great distance. We've had significant regulatory issues, but mainly labour and infrastructure issues.

We have been working with the government to identify the infrastructure projects that we would like to see prioritized so that we can have a more robust supply chain. Also, we have great concerns with labour agreements and the whole Labour Code, frankly, because there are too many lockouts and too many strikes, which lead to instability. When that happens, we lose market share. I gave the example of Indonesia. There's one purchaser of potash in that region, and if that person, because of a strike in Vancouver, doesn't get their shipment of potash, they switch to Belarus or Russia, and they don't easily come back because they've already been burned. Reliability is key.

We live in a dangerous and unpredictable world. We can't control wars, and we can't control a lot of tariffs that are imposed by other countries, but we can control our infrastructure for transportation, our labour framework and our regulatory system. If we can align those things, we will be able to ship a great deal more product from Canada around the world, including to Mercosur, which is a growing market. The thing about this market is that it's almost 300 million people. It's almost as big as the United States, and this offers all kinds of opportunities for fair trade.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll move to Monsieur Savard-Tremblay for two and a half minutes, please.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm now going to turn to the Canadian Meat Council representatives.

I won't ask you the same question I asked the chicken farmers regarding deforestation, because in the case of cattle, it's been clearly shown. We have the data. We know that up to 80% of deforestation in the Amazon is due to cattle farming. Obviously, the environmental consequences are clear. We live in a world where everything's interconnected. Moreover, it's said that the Amazonian forest is the lung of the Earth. That's been shown.

From a strictly economic point of view, given you have processors in your membership, do you fear this could tarnish the reputation of Canadian meat, for example, if non-traceable imports were to occur as a result of an agreement with Mercosur? If not, would there be other unsuspected consequences?

[Claire Citeau]

Regarding rules of origin, I think the measures adopted as part of free trade agreements, whether with the United States, Asian countries or other countries, must be respected. I think the standards that Canada has adopted in this area need to be followed. I don't think we need to worry about those standards not being met.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

You're more enthusiastic than I am. Usually, when we talk to negotiators or minister about agreements with other countries, as was the case most recently with Indonesia and Ukraine, or with countries where we know the standards are not the same and we talk to them about workers' rights or environmental issues that would cause an imbalance, they say they're still at the hypothesis stage, but that it is the start of a discussion. When we ask them if there's anything binding, the answer is always no.

What encouraging elements do you see?

[Claire Citeau]

Actually, what I meant was when our principles and provisions are written in black and white, our standards must be respected. That's what's important.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

So there would be no risk of meat—

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm sorry, Mr. Savard-Tremblay. Your time is up.

Next is Mr. Mantle, please, for five minutes.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for appearing before the committee today.

I have a few questions for you, Mr. Bourque, with respect to fertilizer production in Canada. I want to make sure I understand, first, the main components that go into the production of fertilizer. I understand those are nitrogen, phosphate and potash. Is it correct that Canada currently has no operating phosphate mines?

[Michael Bourque]

That's true. There are a couple of projects being worked on, but this is an area that we could be focusing a lot more on.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

I believe there's a project in Quebec that's been on the books for over a decade now—Lac à Paul.

[Michael Bourque]

In Ontario as well....

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Okay.

My understanding is that the last phosphate mine closed in about 2012 or 2013. That was the Kapuskasing mine in Ontario. Is that correct?

[Michael Bourque]

That predates me in my role, but I would be happy to get the information on phosphate mines for you.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Sure. Whatever you can provide would be fine.

Is it fair to say that we've had no new mines open in at least 15 years?

[Michael Bourque]

We haven't for phosphate.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

We need it. We have it. Why can't we open any new mines on this?

[Michael Bourque]

I'll add to that. We have not had any new nitrogen production either, which is probably more important.

Nitrogen is produced wherever you have inexpensive natural gas or electricity. We have a plant in Ontario that was built when electricity was less expensive, and we have a plant in Alberta. There have been people who've looked at expanding into Alberta. So far we haven't seen the investment. It would make a lot of sense to do that.

For phosphate, certainly, there are areas with potential. It wouldn't be just for fertilizer. It would also be for critical mineral use, but there would be fertilizer application. Because we currently import 100% of our phosphate, this would be a very good thing to focus on, as would nitrogen fertilizer, which is considerably more expensive in Canada than in other countries—well, certainly than it is in the Middle East.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Thank you for that.

My understanding is that, according to the OECD, it takes about 19 years for a mine to get approved in Canada. Do you think our long approval times are having a detrimental effect on new investment in building mines for phosphate or for the production of nitrogen?

[Michael Bourque]

Certainly, the regulatory system can be improved. That's a very long time. I think if you were to speak to BHP, they could attest to the fact that it took a very long time to build that mine, which is slated to open next year in Saskatchewan. Yes, we can improve our regulatory approvals system and attract more investment.

The other side of it is the great deal of uncertainty around carbon policy, climate change policy and how those are going to apply to large emitters that are trade-exposed, as anybody in the nitrogen business would be.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

I understand that the primary feedstock for the production of nitrogen is LNG. Is that right?

[Michael Bourque]

Yes, it's natural gas.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

That's for energy. It won't be a surprise that we have a lot of this in Canada.

[Michael Bourque]

We should have more nitrogen production here, there's no doubt.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Given that, were you surprised or was the industry surprised to see no nitrogen, phosphate or anything to do with fertilizer production identified as a major project and referred to the Major Projects Office?