NDDN meeting 26 · 2026-03-09 — Committee Evidence — LegisWatch

Summary

This House of Commons National Defence committee meeting examined the nexus between national defence, national security, and the critical minerals sector. Appearing as witnesses were Nadia Mykytczuk (Laurentian University), Rodrigue Turgeon (MiningWatch Canada), Heather Exner-Pirot (Macdonald-Laurier Institute), Jim Balsillie (as an individual), and Sean Boyd (Agnico Eagle Mines Limited).

Nadia Mykytczuk argued that Canada's defence sovereignty is inseparable from its mineral sovereignty, with the real strategic vulnerability being a lack of domestic processing capacity and supply chain dependence rather than geology. She recommended treating mine waste valorization as a strategic reserve for near-term mineral sources, embedding mineral expertise in defence research structures, and protecting Canadian intellectual property arising from mineral innovation within procurement frameworks.

Rodrigue Turgeon stated that despite security threats cited for years, Canadian governments have not given authorities greater leverage over access to and control of minerals, and he observed high collaboration with the U.S. Department of War on mining projects alongside a diplomatic rapprochement with China. He recommended that Canada clearly communicate its position on foreign access to critical minerals, enshrine the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in mining laws, and pursue mineral sobriety rather than increased production for military purposes.

Heather Exner-Pirot distinguished between minerals important to the economy, electrification, and those essential to defence that China has monopolized, arguing that stockpiles are not a solution for most critical minerals. She recommended focusing scarce resources on niche products like gallium and germanium, rebuilding Canada's lost expertise in translating raw materials into munitions and energetics, and coordinating processing and refining capacity with allies.

Jim Balsillie argued that Canada's policy thinking remains rooted in the 1970s, causing systemic erosion of prosperity and security because wealth and power now depend on intangible assets like intellectual property and data AI. He recommended creating an expert economic council or secretariat within the Privy Council Office to develop strategies for capturing value through patent pools, sovereign compute, and participation in global standard-setting, noting that the November budget and defence industrial strategy were missed opportunities.

Sean Boyd emphasized that Arctic sovereignty begins with socio-economic benefits and strong communities, and he highlighted Agnico Eagle's $10-billion investment in Nunavut and plans to reopen the Hope Bay mine on the Northwest Passage. He recommended improving regulatory certainty by eliminating duplication in permitting processes, coordinating with the Department of National Defence on infrastructure and logistics, and focusing on skills training to support northern development.

During questions, witnesses addressed foreign ownership thresholds, with Exner-Pirot noting that junior miners are most susceptible to Chinese investment and Boyd stating that context matters depending on the deposit's importance. Balsillie added that owning minerals does not provide leverage without the ability to process them into products. On processing capacity, Mykytczuk noted that Canada has lost expertise as facilities like Sherritt Technologies closed, and Boyd said quick wins could come from reopening older permitted operations. Exner-Pirot stressed the need for a product-by-product plan with NATO allies, while Balsillie urged creating a sovereign patent pool and reforming defence procurement to retain intellectual property in Canada. Turgeon disagreed with the premise that increased mining is necessary, arguing that climate change is a national security threat and that Canada must reduce mineral overconsumption. The committee also discussed procedural matters, including upcoming meetings on the Iran conflict and the appearance of the Minister of National Defence.

AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official evidence.

Witnesses · 5

Nadia Mykytczuk

Executive Director, Goodman School of Mines, Laurentian University

Opening remarks

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hello. Aanii. Good morning to everyone. Thanks to the members of the committee for this opportunity to appear today. As the chair said, I'm Dr. Nadia Mykytczuk, executive director of the Goodman School of Mines at Laurentian University. I'm also the president and CEO of MIRARCO Mining Innovation, and I hold an NOHFC industrial research chair in biomining and bioremediation. I'm based in Sudbury, Ontario, one of Canada's historic mining regions and a global centre of mining innovation. My remarks today focus on the relationship between critical minerals, research capacity and Canada's long-term defence sovereignty. I'd like to start with one point: Canada's defence sovereignty is inseparable from its mineral sovereignty. Modern defence systems are fundamentally materials-dependent. Advanced communications systems, aerospace sensors, autonomous systems and electrified military infrastructure all rely on secure access to critical minerals such as nickel, copper, cobalt and rare earth elements. Canada is very fortunate to possess significant mineral resources. However, the real strategic vulnerability today is not our geology; it is our processing capacity…

Full testimony ↗

Rodrigue Turgeon

Lawyer, National program Co-Lead, MiningWatch Canada

Opening remarks

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…

Heather Exner-Pirot

Director, Energy, Natural Resources and Environment, Macdonald-Laurier Institute

Opening remarks

Thank you, Chair and committee members, for the opportunity to speak to you today. When we first started talking about and prioritizing critical minerals—probably around 2019—it was largely in the context of the energy transition and the need for minerals to replace fossil fuels. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and American concerns with Chinese rivalry, the policy focus has recently turned to critical minerals' roles in defence supply chains. After a late start, I would say that the G7 and western nations, including Canada, are starting to take the issue seriously, and some advances are being made, but this attention has also served to reveal how serious and complex the issue is. I want to make a few points in my opening remarks to kick off the discussion. First is how we define critical minerals. There is a clear distinction among minerals that are important to the economy and trade, minerals that are important to electrification and minerals that are essential to defence and industrial processes but have been intentionally monopolized by China. I think the focus of defence policy should be to intervene in markets for niche products that the…

Full testimony ↗