Thinking “critical” about opportunities in Canada’s mining sector

Most of Canada’s global allies have established a list of the minerals and metals they have defined as “critical.” These lists commonly include minerals like lithium, rare earth elements and platinum group metals.

Here in Canada, these critical minerals are at the centre of every government’s plan for economic, technological and climate-oriented development, particularly as ongoing trade disputes threaten to upend global supply chains. We are seeing this narrative play out daily in Canada. As US President Trump promises to slap a ten per cent tariff on Canada’s critical minerals and a 25 per cent tariff on all other areas of the Canadian economy, Canada is seized with domesticating its supply chains, shoring up our ability to develop the products Canada needs domestically, while at the same time developing the minerals that entice new trading partners and allies.

With global conversations about the importance of “critical minerals,” it might be natural to assume that every global jurisdiction is on the same page about what is and is not a “critical mineral”.  However, when we look more closely, it turns out there is a lot of subjectivity involved in this “critical” designation, and these lists are not only different from country to country but even province to province. Further, these lists are not static, as what is on a given jurisdiction’s list is subject to change based on demand, political dynamics, technological developments and, according to the Government of Canada, “shifting societal needs.”

For Canada, a critical mineral is defined based on the following criteria:

• Few or no substitutes;
• Strategic and somewhat limited commodities; or,
• Increasingly concentrated in terms of extraction and, even more, in terms of processing location.

Further, Canada’s critical minerals strategy identifies six distinct critical minerals (what I like to call “supercritical” minerals) for their “distinct potential to spur Canadian economic growth and their necessity as inputs for priority supply chains” and that these minerals “represent the greatest opportunity to fuel domestic manufacturing.” These supercritical minerals are lithium, graphite, cobalt, nickel, copper and rare earth elements and have been chosen largely due to the key role these minerals play in batteries and climate technologies.

Meanwhile, across the border, the United States’ definition of critical minerals relies heavily on how a mineral or metal contributes to the supply chain for energy technologies and security. Australia, another global leader in mining, has chosen its list based on whether minerals or metals are “essential to modern technologies, economies, and national security, and whose supply chains are vulnerable to disruption.”

We are currently in an intense period of political change. The definition of essential technologies may itself change. A future potential Canadian Conservative government may not consider the rapid development of specific technologies, like electric vehicles, the top priority for Canada, as it had previously been. Meanwhile, our current relationship with the United States is raising new concerns about Canada’s national defence capabilities; perhaps “shifting societal need[s]” now dictates defence applications play a more prominent role in what is “critical” for Canada.

As evident during the recent Liberal Leadership debates, Canada is also looking to align itself with new trading partners and supply chains. Given the dynamic with the Trump Presidency, this is likely true regardless of the outcome of the next Canadian federal election. This provides an opportunity for Canada’s mining sector to prove it’s both providing the critical commodities that other countries need while also meeting domestic demand, thereby growing job opportunities in skilled labour, contributing to the growth of local economies, and supporting Canadian-based novel technologies.

And the pending federal election represents a great opportunity for this change.

In nearly every likely government scenario to emerge from the upcoming federal election, we are looking at a government led by a leader and supported by a population increasingly more pro-domestic development than we have seen in Canada over the past ten years.

This opens a door for those producing metals and minerals not currently defined as “critical” to seize the moment and access future opportunities, and for those currently defined as “critical” to educate the new government about their contributions to the Canadian economy. Big changes pose big opportunities, and it’s time for Canada’s mining supply chain to once again think big about how it can seize the current moment.