International Trade Committee on Sept. 24th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Madame Lapointe, go ahead.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Welcome, everyone. The testimony has been very interesting.

Ms. Exner-Pirot, you spoke earlier about Bill C‑39. Today was the first day we've heard testimony on this. I spoke about Bill C‑39 earlier.

You said that it would help ensure access. When you referred to it, you were talking about ensuring the consistency of supply chains and the predictability of it all, I believe. I'd like to hear your comments on that. What is your main interest in Bill C‑39?

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

That's a great question.

Obviously, Bill C-5 was passed last year. It was a welcome shift in tone, I think, and an indication that the Carney government was seeking to build things and have a government that is known for building things. However, it was criticized, including by me, as being a band-aid solution, keeping what was very much a flawed regulatory system but allowing some projects to bypass it. This was a tacit acknowledgement that the regulatory system itself had many problems. I've been very pleased to see Bill C-39 come out as a way to fix some of the underlying problems that Bill C-5 was really just trying to get around.

I also think it was strategic and wise, and it makes sense, to tackle transportation, labour and major projects all within the same bill. It has been criticized for being omnibus, but those are obviously three links in the same chain that would be difficult to address.... If someone is trying to build a mine, they need a way to transport to market and need to make sure that the ports and rail are reliable when they transport. Clearly, it's a holistic approach to our trade challenges.

I've been closely watching responses. I haven't heard one yet from the Mining Association of Canada, and I look forward to that. In general, I can say from the western Canadian business side that all four of the western provinces have supported it and several oil and gas companies have supported it. It seems to me to be doing some very positive work in making us more competitive on trade.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you very much. You looked at Mr. Gratton, intending to pass him the ball.

Mr. Gratton, what do you think of Bill C‑39?

[Pierre Gratton]

First, I would say that improvements to the assessment system are already under way in our sector. We're seeing improvements, according to the work of the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. There are improvements on the environmental front, timelines are getting better and collaboration with the provinces is improving. Now, there's even an agreement between the federal government and the Government of Quebec. That's something I never thought I'd see in my career.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

It will continue.

[Pierre Gratton]

I hope so, but that can change.

Bill C‑39 brings other improvements, especially in the regulatory framework surrounding the Fisheries Act and the Canadian Navigable Waters Act. These are issues that the government is trying to address—things we've been asking for over the past several years.

It should be noted that the law is one thing, but the rules and regulations that will follow the act are also important. For example, we know it took several years for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to make the necessary changes after Bill C‑69 was passed. I hope it will act more quickly this time.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you very much.

I'm going to come back to a point you mentioned earlier. When you talked about capacity, you mentioned copper, zinc and another mineral. On the one hand, you referred to China and the loss of technology and expertise. On the other, the Standing Committee on International Trade travelled to Brazil and Argentina to study Mercosur, and those countries wanted our expertise and equipment. These seem like two things that don't go together.

I'd like to hear your comments on that.

[Pierre Gratton]

I'm specifically referring to the technology used in copper smelters. Right now, the smelters we operate in Canada are using 100-year-old technology. The refineries and smelters in China or India are much more modern than ours.

They have the property rights, the copyright and the IP.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

So you were mainly referring to smelters, not mining sector equipment. Is that correct?

[Pierre Gratton]

That's right. In that respect, we have many advantages on a global scale compared to other countries. We're the third largest in the world, so it doesn't surprise me at all that Argentina wants our expertise in this area. However, when it comes to refining, we've lost the upper hand to the Chinese.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mr. Simard, please, for six minutes.

[Mario Simard]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

It's good to see the witnesses again. We met not too long ago at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources to address a similar issue.

In fact, Ms. Exner-Pirot, I remember that you created a table to analyze critical minerals not under a single umbrella, because different critical minerals require strategies that aren't always the same. This table was helpful to us as we drafted our report.

Earlier, I was thinking that if we want to have effective export strategies, I suppose we should do the same type of exercise, because we won't have the opportunity to export all critical minerals. Some may be more relevant than others.

So, I don't know if you'd be willing to take on this exercise and draw up another table that would help us understand, among the critical minerals we have, which ones are likely to be marketed in Europe or other parts of the world.

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

I accept your offer and your request.

Some of you in committee last year.... I worked very hard—12 hours—after the study on a request of his to present a table that we published at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.

One more table that I'll highlight for you, Monsieur Simard, that I've done since compares the last five commodity cycles, which I think would also be of interest to you. It shows what an upswing usually looks like and what a downswing looks like, as well as the geological, geopolitical and technological drivers of those and what they mean for Canada in this particular cycle because of the particular drivers we're seeing in this.

I'd be happy to use my brain and figure out one further step, to your point.

[Mario Simard]

Thank you very much. I don't want to put any pressure on you, but you did this in less than 24 hours last time.

I may have a question for you, Ms. Exner-Pirot, but also for you, Mr. Gratton. Before we start developing the various critical minerals, I feel like we have a major challenge: infrastructure. Infrastructure is essential for a mining project to get off the ground. The key to success is having the infrastructure to transport the ore out. I think this is a challenge that's holding back a number of projects.

I don't know if you've each, on your own, tried to identify which corridors to prioritize—both because they're more accessible and because they require less investment and cover a significant number of mining projects. I don't know if you've done this exercise, but I'd like to hear your comments on it—on a sound strategy the government could implement in terms of infrastructure.

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

I'll say I'm sure they have a better one. We know the seven or eight major basins we have in Canada and the areas we want to improve. I'm sure the golden triangle and the Sudbury basin would be at the top of their list.

I want to highlight one thing. I am working with the Inuit Development Corporation Association. It receives money from CanNor to look at all of the mines in Inuit Nunangat, from discovery to the advanced stages, and the enabling infrastructure and the lack of it. That should be done by January.

I'll make sure that we also submit a copy of it to this committee. It may be too late for this study, but it should be of interest.

[Photinie Koutsavlis, Vice-President, Economic Affairs and Climate Change, Mining Association of Canada]

Thank you very much for the question.

As we all know, Canada is a very big country, and most of our geological endowment is found in areas of our country that cannot be accessed by road, rail or even port. Some of those areas have very rich endowments, and there are a number of projects in their very early stages in those particular areas. However, the infrastructure deficit essentially makes those projects completely uneconomic to move forward.

The areas we can possibly look at are in the northern parts of Canada. The Nunavut Grays Bay road and port project is a prospective area in the Slave geological area. Northern B.C. has enormous potential as well. Heather called it the golden triangle. I think they're also trying to turn it into the golden triangle or the copper corridor. That's important to mention, because there's a significant deposit of copper in northern B.C. In Ontario and Quebec, we have the possibility of lithium as well.

If you look across the number of critical minerals we have, where they're located, where the projects are and the fact that you can't move the rocks, we need to open up those particular areas to build up the projects and move product to tidewater for export.

All that is to say that B.C., northern Ontario, Quebec and our territories will be important parts of our country to focus on.

[Mario Simard]

I encourage you to think about processing. I come from Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, a region where aluminum is very important. Midstream and downstream processing are virtually impossible because of the Midwest Premium. I wonder if, for other minerals, there is something equivalent that, in a way, hinders the ability to create added value and engage in processing.

Maybe I'll come back to that later. I would encourage you to think about it. Perhaps my next two minutes will focus on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

If there are any reports that you want to distribute to the committee, send them to the clerk, and they will be distributed to all committee members.

Because we started late, we'll have to do four-minute rounds.

Mr. McKenzie, go ahead.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Picking up on that subject of discussion, are you aware of any announcements of infrastructure spending that the federal government has made that are going to support some of the access issues you've just mentioned?

[Pierre Gratton]

The government has announced funding for improving the capacity of the hydro line in northwest B.C., the so-called copper corridor. They have provided some funding to advance the Grays Bay port and road project. That's going to take a long time to build, but they're advancing the feasibility study around it. The first and last mile fund has promising initiatives, and I expect we'll start to see more come from that new funding envelope for different types of projects.

Those are the main ones we've seen so far.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Is there anything respecting road and rail at this point?

[Photinie Koutsavlis]

There's the Grays Bay road and port project.

[Pierre Gratton]

Yes, the Grays Bay road and port project. They've also provided some highway funding for the Northwest Territories.