Canada’s critical minerals boom meets a sovereignty chill

Three-in-five Canadians say Ottawa should curb foreign ownership of critical resources, even if it slows projects and costs jobs – a signal that political and regulatory risk may be rising faster than capital for the sector. 

According to the Angus Reid Institute, 59 percent of respondents see “losing sovereignty” over resources such as oil and gas, copper, nickel and key minerals as a bigger threat to the economy than “missing out on development and jobs because of a lack of investment.”  

Only 29 percent view lost development as the greater risk. 

Public wants limits on foreign money 

The non-profit pollster finds that 60 percent of Canadians believe foreign investment in critical resources should be limited even if it slows development, while just 25 percent say Canada should generally welcome foreign capital.  

Even within that pro-investment minority, only about one-third would leave all resources open to foreign buyers without restrictions on what can be owned. 

Those views sit squarely in the middle of a live policy file.  

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government has elevated critical resources in its economic plan and expanded the list of projects under the Major Projects Office, which exists to fast-track developments “deemed to be of national importance and significance,” Angus Reid Institute notes. 

Teck–Anglo American deal shows where Ottawa is leaning 

The proposed takeover of Teck Resources by British-based Anglo American illustrates how that sentiment may be shaping policy.  

Teck is one of Canada’s largest critical mineral companies.  

According to the Angus Reid Institute, the federal government has put the deal on hold as it presses for the combined entity to be “re-domiciled” in Canada and subjected to Canadian tax, regulatory and financial reporting rules. 

In parallel, Ottawa has repeatedly intervened in transactions involving Chinese investors.  

The Harper government’s 2012 decision to allow a Chinese state oil company to acquire Nexen, alongside Malaysia’s Petronas purchase of Progress Energy, led to a commitment that future oilsands takeovers by foreign buyers would be allowed only “on an exceptional basis.”  

Angus Reid Institute notes that: 

• In 2020, Canada blocked Chinese-based Shandong Gold Mining from buying a Nunavut gold mine; a Toronto-based company later acquired the parent. 

• In 2022, the federal government ordered three Chinese firms to divest from three Canadian critical mining companies. 

• In 2024, Ottawa intervened to stop the sale of a stockpile of critical minerals to a Chinese company and diverted those materials to the Saskatchewan Resource Council. 

While many of these decisions focus on China, the public mood is broader. 

Canadians would block not just rivals, but allies 

Angus Reid Institute asked which countries Canadians would bar from owning stakes in critical resource developments.  

The top responses are states already subject to sanctions or embargoes: Russia (69 percent), North Korea (67 percent) and Iran (60 percent). China follows at 59 percent. 

Strikingly for Canadian and cross-border investors, more than one-third of respondents – 37 percent – say they would also block the United States from investing in Canadian critical resources.  

The survey places that result against “threats to sovereignty” from US President Donald Trump and a continuing tariff dispute. 

The institute also notes that the Trump administration has acquired stakes in two Vancouver-headquartered critical mineral companies, deals that the federal government can still move to block. 

What Canadians want in a US minerals deal 

Canada and the US remain in talks over tariffs and other economic issues, with a potential agreement on critical minerals and energy reportedly part of the stalled negotiations.  

If there is no deal in the coming months, the joint review of the Canada-US-Mexico Agreement looms next year. 

In any agreement that grants the US access to Canadian critical minerals, Canadians say they would most likely prioritise: 

• Cutting tariffs and trade barriers; and 

• Guaranteeing value-added jobs in Canada. 

Both options attract support from roughly two-thirds of respondents, according to the Angus Reid Institute.  

Other potential trade-offs – such as shoring up supply management, securing US investment or enhancing security co‑operation – rank considerably lower. 

Investors look to Ottawa as much as to markets 

On the funding side, the federal budget has begun to formalise Ottawa’s role.  

Angus Reid Institute reports that the government is combining tax credits with a new $2bn sovereign wealth fund for critical minerals, designed to inject public capital directly into the space and crowd in private money. 

Canadians remain divided on how they want projects financed, but most want government involved in some form.  

The survey finds: 

• 31 percent prefer public–private partnerships; 

• 25 percent want projects mostly funded by private companies, with the state providing tax breaks or credits; 

• 18 percent favour full funding by provincial and federal governments; and 

• 12 percent say government should stay out of project financing entirely. 

Taken together, 74 percent believe government should play a role in funding new critical resource developments.