Mr. Chair and member of Parliament for Mississauga—Lakeshore, vice-Chairs, honourable members of Parliament, members of the committee; Mr. Clerk and members of your team, good morning. Thank you for having me.
My name is Rodrigue Turgeon. I am a lawyer and co-spokesperson and co-director of the national program at Mining Watch Canada.
Founded in 1999, Mining Watch Canada brings together 25 organizations which, collectively, represent several hundred thousand people across the country. The environment, human rights, indigenous rights, transparency and accountability of Canadian mining companies, both in Canada and abroad; for the past 27 years, our mission has centred on all these issues, at both the community and public policy levels.
As international institutions erode and Canada finds itself on the front line between three geopolitical powers—China, the United States and Russia—many voices are calling for the country to exercise greater control over the mineral resources within its territory. Taken to their extreme, these fears raise the possibility that foreign states might use Canada’s so-called critical minerals for economic, industrial or military purposes in a manner hostile to the country’s security and sovereignty.
The strategies of the Canadian and provincial governments regarding so-called critical minerals all relate to the purely economic issue of supply chains. Indeed, contrary to what industry and governments would have the public believe, it is by no means mandatory that these mineral substances be used for the energy transition. However, despite the security threats that have been cited for several years, we find virtually nothing in previous and recent bills tabled in the country that would give the authorities greater leverage regarding access to and control over minerals.
At present, we observe that governments seem more concerned about scaring off foreign investors or raising trade barriers than about foreign states using minerals extracted from Canadian soil against them. Paradoxically, we are even seeing a very high level of collaboration between the Government of Canada and that of the United States, including the Department of War, in the joint development, within the country, of numerous mining projects deemed critical or of national importance, and we are witnessing a diplomatic rapprochement between the Government of Canada and China.
To ensure consistency with its strategy, the Government of Canada should clearly communicate its position to the public regarding its tolerance or refusal to allow each foreign country access to the country’s critical minerals. It should then act in accordance with its position, by avoiding collaboration with foreign entities hostile to Canada’s actual security, by denying them access to so-called critical minerals and, at the very least, by avoiding expediting the issuance of authorizations to such entities.
Under no circumstances must the country’s minerals be used for the creation or proliferation of weapons used in violation of international law, including in acts of genocide, whether employed by the country itself or by a third state.
One thing is certain: further damage to the environment, the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities is to be expected if Canada insists on increasing mining production for military, national security or national defence purposes.
Across Canada and internationally, Canada and its provinces claim to stand out for their ability to produce minerals that are not only critical but also responsibly sourced. We do not agree with this vision. Governments should enshrine the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in mining laws, recognize that clean air and clean water are vital to Canada’s national security, and focus their efforts on achieving mineral sobriety across all minerals and sectors, including national defence. In other words, Canada’s overconsumption of minerals must be reduced.
There is a cost to rushing through authorizations for mining projects. This opens the door to bad projects, which are dangerous for the safety of workers, indigenous peoples, local communities and the environment. The Government of Canada must also close the door to seabed mining for military or other purposes. The national defence strategy regarding minerals referred to as critical must not rely in any way on the use of nuclear energy.
Like a large segment of civil society, we condemn the diversion of funds and efforts intended for the energy transition. The climate emergency is not merely a vague geopolitical threat, but a real danger to national security. We cannot negotiate peace with nature.
Thank you for your attention and for considering our recommendations and our brief on the nexus between critical minerals, national security and national defence.