A TORRENT OF TALENT

A recent TD Economics report confirms that Canadian brain drain is very real. But, as many in the tech industry know, it’s worse than that.

The roots of Canadian brain drain run deep.

Canada boasts a long history of educating homegrown talent, churning out leading research, and attracting highly skilled immigrants. As a result, the country has one of the most educated populations on the planet and a higher-than-expected capacity for research and innovation.

But Canada’s inability to retain many of its most ambitious citizens does not reflect those strengths.

A TD Economics report released in May of 2026 calls this a “silent” brain drain. But as many in the tech industry already know, that drain can be pretty loud and torrential.

Speaking at Toronto Tech Week 2026, Uber Co-founder Andrew MacDonald explains how big the brain drain problem has become.

“I think we have a bigger problem today… the most highly contributing members of society are leaving. It’s not just doctors, it’s capital. It’s entrepreneurs. It’s trained senior executive talent. It’s people who just want to like build the Canadian dream, but take that to America.”

That drain siphons off our most skilled contributors — and most fruitful tax base:

1. Workers: like engineers, doctors, and nurses

2. Entrepreneurs: builders, from AI to IT

3. Businesses: which create growth and jobs

This is a systemic problem and appears to range from the cultural (risk aversion and tall poppy syndrome) to the structural (high personal and corporate taxes).

As a result, in some ways, Canada has become a feeder system for the U.S. innovation economy. Canadian founders and researchers go on to create immense value and generate high-paying jobs elsewhere. That production translates into significant tax revenue paid by the corporations, employees, and founders.

It begs the question: Imagine if even a fraction of those ventures remained anchored in Canada?

Culture clash: The ‘tall poppy’ problem

Could our brain drain problem have some roots in our culture?

‘Tall poppy syndrome’ is roughly defined as the practice of throttling or sidelining people with ambition. That marginalization is considered by many to be more common across the former British colonies:

“In Europe and Australia, there is something called the Tall Poppy Syndrome: People like to cut the tall poppies. They don’t want you to succeed, and they cut you down — especially people from your own social class.” — TV Producer Mark Burnett

The U.S., in contrast, was seeded with an Ayn Rand-like individualism. We see this reflected in how the U.S. ecosystem attracts ventures, capital, talent, and more lucrative positions.

A knock-on effect of Canada’s notorious risk aversion is that it makes life harder for young people wanting to move into the middle class. Now, tales of opportunity to the south have piqued the interest of many young Canadians. This is no surprise. Grads are struggling to find work in their specialty, and even in ‘survivor’ jobs are often out of reach.

Revealing that sentiment, a 2025 Ipsos survey found that a whopping 43% of Canadians aged 18-34 would vote for Canada to become part of the U.S., followed by 33% aged 35-54 and 17% aged 55+.

Those sentiments were based heavily on financial security.

Three faces of Canadian brain drain

1. Talent gets pruned

For a smaller country, Canada has done an impressive job of generating globally competitive talent, from STEM to the arts. But it also loses them at higher rates.

Canada has become a veritable training ground for high-potential individuals who ultimately become assets for the U.S. economy. But this problem is worse than traditional brain drain metrics suggest.

A May 2026 TD Economics report, ‘Canada’s Silent Brain Drain’, found that the country’s productivity challenges are being magnified by poor retention of top talent. While Canada has strong education and research outcomes, our commercialization, business R&D, tech adoption, and company-scaling potential remain low.

The loss of our top talent extends to immigrants in Canada as well. TD Economics found that those with more education were more likely to leave Canada: doctorates at 34%, master’s at 32%, and bachelor’s at 24%.

“The industrial revolution of our time is happening now, and the forefront is extremely concentrated in one place, and that is San Francisco. Our best people and our best technologies all go to labs and companies. If we invented the future here in Toronto, it slipped away.” — Alex Danco, Andreessen Horowitz Editor-at-Large

Better Dwelling reports that Canadians and permanent residents are leaving at a rate never seen in 74 years of tracking (based on Statistics Canada data).

STEM professionals in particular tend to move to the U.S. most often, partly because it is easier to immigrate with a STEM degree than with a degree in another discipline. Those from highly ranked universities are more likely to leave, especially within the first 5 years after graduation.

TD Economics reports that the highest-performing Waterloo students are most likely to leave, doing so at roughly twice the rate of bottom performers. Meanwhile, the U.S. remains “highly selective of the labour it attracts from Canada, absorbing its upper tail.”

That migration is not just permanent; there is also a drain of temporary high-performing workers. This factor is not included in many brain-drain metrics, yet it significantly worsens the problem.

“If you are a young, ambitious person, the obvious thing to do is to go to San Francisco. If you are a founder looking for money and signal and people and proximity, the obvious thing to do is to go to San Francisco.” — Alex Danco, Andreessen Horowitz Editor-at-Large

Why talent is leaving

While top graduates in Canada may earn fairly well by Canadian standards, others are leaving for better compensation, equity, and upward mobility — all of which are significantly higher in the U.S.

Median pre-tax tech wages are ~46% higher in the States (TMU, 2023), and taxes can be 30-40% lower.

High-skill exits reduce productivity here at home, limit entrepreneurship, and lead to knowledge loss. Productivity is one of the most important factors in building the middle class, reducing poverty, and improving living standards. This suggests that brain drain could be part of why Canada’s standards have been in decline for years.

The result is a runaway feedback loop that decreases upward mobility, shrinks our middle class, and makes life harder for everyone left in Canada.

“I think when you have people leaving because they feel like we’ve lost the plot a little bit here. Not just in the domain of tech. — Uber Co-founder Andrew MacDonald

2. Entrepreneurs and capital flee

The Canadian dream heads south as builders flee to greener pastures.

Beyond its individual workers, Canada is also losing the entrepreneurs and founders that drive innovation and scaling.

These discussions have been percolating in the tech community for years, but notable leaders and industry groups like Build Canada are pushing for change.

Canada currently lags behind in business R&D and tech adoption, scaling, and commercialization. The tax environment is also not particularly friendly.

High personal tax rates begin at relatively low thresholds (~C$218k federal top bracket, adjusted), and business taxes are fairly complex. This all places a focus on planning systems rather than scaling a business.

Ultimately, builders are incentivized in multiple ways to move to the States.

Canada's top marginal tax rates exceed 50% in places like Ontario (53.53%), Quebec (53.3%), and BC (53.5%). Compare that with Florida and Texas, which max out at a flat 37% federal rate. Even high-tax U.S. jurisdictions like California (~50.3%) and NYC (~52%) have far higher income thresholds before the top rate applies. While a Canadian hits the 53%+ ceiling at around $260,000 CAD (~$190,000 USD) in BC, an American must earn between $1 million and $25 million USD to trigger those equivalent 50%+ rates.

Canada’s shrinking middle class is also reflected in the business world. Canada relies heavily on small businesses for employment (47% of jobs vs. 33% in the U.S.), while medium and large firms employ far fewer people than in the U.S. This is partly due to less available capital, regulatory burdens when scaling, and smaller markets and revenue.

As a result, ambitious entrepreneurs and capital flow south where deeper VC markets, larger addressable markets, equity-heavy compensation, and clearer growth paths exist.

3. Corporations pack up and head south

People, builders, operations: the brain drain trifecta emerges when a corporation leaves.

It naturally follows that many Canadian-founded firms would choose to scale in the U.S., given access to larger markets and more favourable tax regimes and regulatory frameworks.

When companies relocate even part of their operations, stock market indexing, and/or headquarters, or choose to scale up stateside, this can reduce the number of roles in Canada, dampen industry growth, and reduce the tax base.

For instance, in January 2026, GFL Environmental (North America's fourth-largest waste management giant with a $21-billion market cap) announced it would relocate its headquarters from Ontario to Florida, citing market access, market indexing, and the ability to attract highly skilled talent stateside. That was largely a structural move. While GFL has left its footprint in Canada, the movement of executives siphons off decision-making and wealth-creation opportunities, which reduces the company’s capacity to scale in Canada.

If companies can’t reach critical mass at home, Canada risks becoming a “branch-plant nation”, something that AI Minister Evan Solomon acknowledges. He admits: “We’ve got to do better.”

“The fundamental problem isn’t attracting talent but anchoring it: Canada produces strong research and education outcomes but underperforms on commercialization, business R&D, tech adoption, and scaling firms, which lowers the domestic returns to skill and entrepreneurship versus U.S. innovation clusters.” — TD Economics

The movement of businesses and builders compounds the traditional brain drain of individuals. Without a healthy middle tier of SMEs, talent is no longer anchored in Canada, and entrepreneurs have fewer skilled people to build with.

Complex and hefty corporate taxes also reward staying small or lead to a focus on tax-planning and deferral strategies rather than scaling and investing in growth.

Creating a winning culture

While businesses and people are currently forced to build small, earn small, or look for greener pastures, there are ways Canada can break out of its feeder-system cycle of educating talent, incubating ideas, and then waving goodbye as companies, jobs, and tax revenues flee.

Perhaps Calgary can provide a template. With lower operating costs and higher salaries, startups enjoy a more convivial environment in which to scale. Its technology sector, for instance, has enjoyed a 40% annual growth rate in tech roles since 2021, which is four times the Canadian average of 9.6%. According to CBRE, between 2021 and 2024, Calgary’s tech workforce expanded by over 61% (CBRE). As Brad Parry, CEO and President of Calgary Economic Development, explains in the National Post, Calgary has “no sales tax, no land transfer tax, and one of the lowest corporate tax rates in all of North America.”

Similarly, the TD report suggests that provinces should embrace incentives that encourage companies to scale rather than relocate to avoid taxes. Addressing tax structures (like personal tax thresholds and business tax simplification) could help build up the missing corporate middle.

Canada’s culture of risk aversion may be difficult to change, but it can start at the top. The first step is to acknowledge the problem. The next step? Creating a healthy ecosystem for SMEs and tall poppies.

“The good news is I do feel like momentum is starting to shift ot that front… but I think brain drain understates the problem that we’ve been having for the last decade.” — Uber Co-founder Andrew MacDonald

AI GROWS UP & QUANTUM COMES KNOCKING

As AI dominates our headlines and PowerPoints, evangelizing the next tech revolution, another industrial shift is quietly knocking at the door.

All the while, AI panic is setting in. Datacenter construction is inspiring controversy. Governance is rapidly shifting. Job displacement is being debated in the public square.

Behind that AI din, quantum computing is being quietly engineered to tackle a different set of problems for applications like supercharged logistics, drug discovery, and financial planning. While AI is engineered to integrate, remix, and leverage data, quantum is built to change what computers can achieve.

When paired together, organizations like McKinsey agree that AI-quantum will redefine entire industries and societies. Thanks to these generous market projections, the money is flowing.

In 2025, the global AI market was estimated at US$390.9 billion and is projected to reach US$3.5 trillion by 2033 (at a whopping CAGR of 30.6%). The global quantum computing market still remains relatively small, at around US$1.4 billion in 2024, but it’s forecasted to reach US$4.2 billion. Some projections put it at US$19.44 billion by 2035.

That’s modest by comparison, but the direction is clear.

Big names like Toronto-based Xanadu are already helping to position Canada as a serious global contender. But new specialized Canadian startups like QuantumCore are beginning to engineer niche applications that will serve as the infrastructure backbone for the quantum commercialization.

“We are acting with urgency because of the rapid acceleration of the large quantum computing programs as seen by the recent Q-Day announcements out of Google Quantum AI Labs.”

— Dr. Christopher Wilson, QuantumCore

The rise of quantum manufacturing

As ‘Big Q’ players like Google build the next big flagship quantum processors, ‘Little Q’ builders are beginning to make their mark.

Startups like Canada’s QuantumCore are positioning themselves as necessary quantum infrastructure: cryogenic electronics, control hardware, and signal‑chain components.

Once the quantum race shifts from lab demos to factory-scale deployment, Little Q is set to become the backbone of the industry.

On the Big Q end of the spectrum, Canada’s Xanadu is eyeing plans to build its first quantum data centre in Toronto, with a large quantum facility targeted for around 2029-30. Founded within Toronto’s research ecosystem by Christian Weedbrook, the company has evolved into a full‑stack photonic quantum player, operating cloud‑accessible processors. It recently went public via a SPAC deal valued at ~US$3.6 billion.

To date, Canada isn’t exporting IP abroad (as is often the case). And there is a long tail of demand for specialized optical modules, cryogenic systems, control electronics, and fabrication capacity. Those are precisely the niches where Little Q companies can thrive.

QuantumCore: Move fast and make things

Production means progress, and QuantumCore is quickly positioning itself as an industrial backbone.

Spun out of the University of Waterloo’s Institute for Quantum Computing, QuantumCore is emerging as a fast-moving Little Q operator. The company has pulled in about $10.7 million CAD in funding within its first months.

If that sounds like a hardware manufacturer that’s ready to scale more than a seed‑stage startup, you’d be right. QuantumCore is on a mission to rapidly become a dedicated hardware partner to the global quantum sector.

In April 2026, QuantumCore completed a reverse takeover and began trading on the Canadian Securities Exchange (QNCR). That gave public investors quick access to quantum infrastructure momentum. As of mid June 2026, QuantumCore’s market capitalization sits around $54 million, trading well above its listing value.

Their rapid moves indicate a healthy investor appetite for quantum supply chain players that support large‑scale quantum computers.

“It’s a necessary product for quantum computing companies that are just a few years away from launching computers with thousands of qubits.”

Manufacturing to scale: The future belongs to the industrious

Because quantum scaling is so difficult, the industry’s progress will likely hinge on manufacturing.

Nature Electronics notes that practical superconducting systems may need “a million or more physical qubits” and that each qubit currently requires its own control line. That makes scaling an engineering nightmare.

Quantum machinations also generate a lot of heat, which is mitigated with cryogenics (yes, that same cryogenics so popular in science fiction). So, manufacturing begins with refrigerators that cool processors to around 10–20 millikelvin (roughly 0.01–0.02 degrees above absolute zero).

The quantum cryogenics market was worth US$490M in 2025, and it’s growing 11.7% a year. Beyond cryogenics, the supply chain also includes superconducting components, precision fabrication elements, and control electronics.

Canada’s vertically integrated quantum ecosystem and the beginnings of Big Q

Canada’s flagship Big Q pioneer, Xanadu, has maintained its Toronto headquarters for roughly a decade, and plans to build its immense quantum data center in 2029 or 2030. That’s right down the road from Waterloo, and indicative of a Waterloo-Toronto quantum pipeline taking further form.

That connection has the potential to build a vertically integrated supply chain that promotes further collaboration and manufacturing across research, education, manufacturing, commerce, and markets.

“Growing the company in the Waterloo ecosystem is crucial because of the big pool of local technical experts, in quantum and other engineering disciplines, access to specialized production resources and the region’s big industrial manufacturing base.”

Canada can now boast more than 100 quantum companies, ranking second globally for quantum SMEs and startups. That ecosystem employs roughly 4,000 people, which is about 5% of the world’s quantum talent (while Canada accounts for only 0.5% of the global population).

Many of those quantum companies are closely linked to universities.

Funding the quantum wave

With strong academic roots and government support, the quantum industry is primed for growth. Indeed, Canada has been building a strong domestic IP base for decades.

While many Canadian deep‑tech rounds still lean heavily on U.S. capital, QuantumCore is bucking that trend with a recent infusion from Canaccord. The company raised $10.7 million CAD in less than a year from multiple sources, structured primarily out of Canada.

In the global quantum sphere, the U.S. is seeing massive investment from Big Tech (Google, IBM, Microsoft) and defence funding. China, the EU, and others are also investing heavily in national quantum strategies.

• U.S. National Quantum Initiative: >US$1.2B initially, with $5B in follow-on spending

• Europe’s Quantum Flaship: US$1.16B

• China National Quantum Lab: US$10B

Commercialization

Now that capital is shifting from research to commercialization and infrastructure, we could soon expect to see enterprise deployment. By 2035, based on recent analysis, McKinsey estimates that quantum computing can generate value in the trillions (USD):

• Energy, materials (chemicals and metals): $550B - $1.1T

• Financial services: $400-600B

• Travel, transport, logistics: $200-500B

• Pharmaceuticals and medical products: $80-400B

McKinsey’s Quantum Monitor also highlights early applications such as logistics route optimization, chemical and molecular simulation, financial risk modelling, and investment portfolio optimization.

Building mode: Quantum jobs and the industrial upside

The debate about AI and jobs is already heating up. Leaders of the AI revolution point to mass job displacement one moment, and mass job creation the next. (We can probably expect to see both scenarios play out to some degree.)

What happens when you couple AI role encroachment with quantum advancements?

Despite recent pushback by activists, quantum, AI, and their data centers offer a welcome outlet for a growing pool of underused technical talent.

Projected data centre roles

Given the declining rates of job availability for recent grads — yes, even in STEM — this presents an especially welcome opportunity: from manufacturing technicians, cryogenics specialists, and hardware engineers, to data center operators and supply chain and logistics roles.

Each data center can provide roughly 30-100 high-paying roles across facilities, engineering, security, and admin.

• Pre-AI data centre: 65-100 permanent jobs per 100MW

• AI‑era hyperscale data centre: 33–52 permanent jobs per 100 MW

The global data centre workforce is expected to grow from roughly 2.3 million in 2025 to over 3.1 million by 2035. That’s an increase of 800,000 jobs over five years.

Projected quantum roles

Recent skills reports estimate global demand for around 250,000 quantum workers by 2030, rising to roughly 840,000 by 2035.

Now that quantum is moving out of the lab, McKinsey and others point to growing demand for roles beyond physicists, including:

• Hardware experts

• Cryogenics technicians

• Data‑centre and cloud operators

• Software engineers

• Systems integrators

The future of the future: The AI-quantum combination that will shake the world

Given the obvious integration of brains (AI) and power (quantum), it wouldn’t be surprising if we soon think of AI and quantum as a technological amalgam: AI as the software layer and quantum as the physical layer.

“... connecting the two could create impact that is larger than the sum of the two.”

— Michael Bogobowickz, Partner, McKinsey & Company

Where AI helps accelerate quantum development (design, simulation, error correction), quantum computing will be able to rapidly enhance AI (optimization, materials discovery, complex modelling). The power-ful combo will also be able to accelerate everything AI touches. Beyond disease diagnosis and treatment, it also creates challenges such as extreme cybersecurity concerns.

Although public discourse has largely been distracted by global AI ambitions, Google’s Quantum AI are targeting commercial‑grade systems by 2029-30 for Google (around the same time as Xanadu’s planned data centre).

First-movers like QuantumCore, which have already begun building infrastructure, will be the cogs in the machine that make this convergence possible.

“Superconducting quantum computing is one of the biggest sectors in terms of industrial development, and there is a lot of Canadian experience and appetite to fund ventures with these startup risk profiles.”

Quantum’s first movers

As quantum goes to market, scalability and industrial layers become real opportunities. This is precisely where companies like QuantumCore become integral to the quantum supply chain.

The time to build is now, with the risk being that countries or ecosystems that delay may miss the opportunity. Hence, QuantumCore’s rapid commercial advancement.

“These companies have raised a lot of capital to build computers, and we want to help them get their quantum processors to the next level.”

Recent analysis spotlights the U.S., China, the EU, Japan, and Canada as the five dominant quantum nations. That analysis, unsurprisingly, also flags the U.S. as the leader in private funding (44% share), research quality, and commercialization.

The quantum future belongs to the industrious

From aerospace to the internet, innovation and invention always require specialized builders who are innovators in their own right.

When it comes to the quantum sector, Canada already achieves more than its small size would suggest. As it has before, the nation’s tech sector has the many tools required to corner the transition from quantum research to manufacturing.

Scaling quantum and bringing it to market will clearly require deep innovation in industry and manufacturing — a part of the chain that Canada could corner.

The foundations of this were laid by research and scientific breakthroughs. Now, Little Q companies are helping to lay the foundation that others will build on.

QuantumCore is emblematic of that potential: quiet, deep-research-based, infrastructure-focused, and increasingly essential to the broader market.

The joke that launched a thousand ships

What does ‘sovereignty’ mean to a fairly small nation like Canada? Perhaps strong borders, secure citizens, robust defence capabilities, autonomy, and money in the bank?

Like most things, it’s debatable. What isn’t debatable is that the country is rekindling its desire to shore up sovereignty, particularly in defence and global partnerships.

Speaking at Toronto Tech Week, Douglas Soltys, Editor in Chief of Betakit, suggested that Trump’s infamous “51st state” wisecrack may have been a turning point for Canada.

In early 2025, Trump’s running gag quickly fanned the embers of anti-U.S. sentiment, contributing to a shift in Canada’s national trajectory: from the heated rivalry of the 2025 Four Nations and a campaign about sharp elbows, to an evolving defence approach.

How much truth is in a joke? Trump’s jab still weighs heavily on Canadians’ collective psyche, possibly influencing economic choices, including defence-tech spending. Of course, Canada’s defence and aerospace industries were already extensive and innovative, with crown jewels like MDA and Bombardier, as well as fiery upstarts like Nordspace.

Meanwhile, “the West is seriously, seriously outgunned en masse in the era of modern warfare,” said Kath Intson, CEO and Co-founder of Sentinel R&D, to a Toronto Tech Week audience. “Iran is producing about 60,000 [military drones] per year. Russia has a goal of making around a million,” she says, “When we look at NATO and Israel combined, we make about 20,000 a year.”

Sentinel Announces Joint Venture with Ukraine’s Airlogix

That’s a glaring gap. And there appear to be others as well, including long procurement timelines and barriers for Canadian companies.

The Canadian government seems eager to address these issues with procurement updates and increased defence spending. The country’s recently announced Defence Industrial Strategy outlined $180 billion in procurement and $290 billion in capital investment in Canadian firms over the next decade. Their goal is to increase the proportion of contracts awarded to Canadian firms to 70% and boost investment in federal defence-related R&D by 85%.

AI and quantum join the ‘defence tech’ ranks

If defence is a core requirement of sovereignty, then defence tech can be a superpower. From communications and intelligence to hardware manufacturing and, now, AI and quantum.

“We just released our most recent [AI] model open source,” Cohere co-founder Nick Frosst explained at Toronto Tech Week, “because I think that that pushes it into the direction of sovereignty enabling for people, for companies, for countries.”

This comment comes a couple of months after Canada announced plans to support ‘sovereign AI’ data centres. The concept of Sovereign AI is often applied to corporations that need to protect their data moats, operations, and customers. It allows systems to be deployed without locking into one vendor, maintaining autonomy over system operations and adaptation. In the case of defence, the ability to control and adapt systems quickly and securely can be mission-critical.

Advanced AI is also being applied across defence tech offerings, from drone-based AI and intelligence analysis to cyberwarfare. Quantum capabilities are also poised to enter the fray.

Christian Weedbrook, founder and CEO of the recently public Xanadu, sees quantum computing as the next big technological leap and inherently dual-use, thereby benefiting from state-driven support: “... the U.S. government and other governments around the world have really injected a lot of money into the development of a large-scale quantum computer.”

A shocking reality: Canada’s ~16-year procurement cycle

If defence tech is a core component of sovereignty, but the average procurement cycle takes over 16 years, is true sovereignty possible?

“We note that the average procurement cycle is 16 and a half years,” said Mina Mitry of Kepler Communications. “That’s beyond the lifespan of any company starting to ever care about government as a user....” By the time the public sector is ready to buy, the startup ecosystem that built the solution has often moved on to another problem.

Eliot Pence of Dominion Dynamics also argues for the rapid prioritization of Canadian companies. “We are now at an inflection point,” he says. “What good looks to me is privileging explicitly Canadian companies…and doing it very quickly. I’m talking week cycles, day cycles, hour cycles.”

In an effort to improve defence procurement, the federal government has established the Defence Investment Agency and the Defence Industrial Strategy to reduce red tape and prioritize domestic manufacturing. The aim is to position the government as a ‘first customer.’ This way, sovereignty-enabling technologies are not pushed toward faster markets and foreign buyers.

The procurement system may require a philosophical shift, not only a procedural one.

As Co-founder and CEO of Build Canada, Lucy Hargreaves noted, the previous model was to “spec out exactly what they wanted in a great amount of detail, and companies would bid for that...” It’s an approach that assumes the state knows the solution before the market does. That rigid process often can’t keep up with the pace of innovation.

Pence suggests that co-development could be essential. He describes a 90-day trial during which a product went through ~200 dot updates and four fundamental refactors: “I would not have known what they wanted unless I had co-developed [with] them...”

Although collaborating more closely with emerging companies could be beneficial, that practice increases the risk that a government becomes responsible for picking tech winners and losers.

Funding woes force Canadian companies out

The early funding gap is notorious in Canada.

As is our reliance on U.S. capital. Roughly 65% of VC capital invested in Canadian startups comes from foreign sources, and mostly from the U.S.

That often compels companies to move stateside, leading to another phenomenon: Canadian companies must prove themselves elsewhere first, then come home.

As Mitry describes: “We started the business, we raised capital from the U.S., we sell to the U.S. as our first customer. We go sell to Europe as our second customer. And we come back to Canada and say, okay, now we’re a qualified entity.”

Pence outlines a procurement and policy environment that historically favoured non‑Canadian firms, forcing Canadian companies to rely on foreign primes/markets: “We took a long time to buy things. And we, generally speaking, privileged, frankly, not Canadian companies.”

It’s now fairly common knowledge that Canadian companies often have to move stateside to take off.

Xanadu’s Weedbrook echoes this problem, explaining why the company decided to work with DARPA in the U.S. “As a startup and entrepreneur,” he says, it’s imperative that they try to “get some of that money....”

If money is limited at home, why not work with a close ally? Weedbrook adds that the Canadian government has established the Canadian Quantum Champions program to help keep Canadian IP and support quantum companies here at home. Related plans could include quantum datacenters, anchored by Canadian talent.

Canada’s international corporate outflow could be viewed as an extreme form of brain drain. Talent, capital, and IP are all more likely to accumulate elsewhere first. In terms of sovereignty, that outflow presents a vulnerability.

AI Minister Evan Solomon acknowledged that he wants companies investing in Canadian talent, “but we don’t just want to be a branch plant nation.” Speaking to the Tech Week audience, he says he wants innovators to stay on home soil, admitting, “We’ve got to do better.”

This challenge largely comes down to investment. According to Elliot Pence, pension plans could play a decisive role in scaling sovereign technologies: “...we should tell the pension funds to invest in Canadian companies. That’s what successful countries do.”

Indeed, countries like Norway are often much more intentional about directing domestic capital toward strategic sectors.

Could Canadian risk aversion be holding it back?

The “fail fast” mantra is common in the tech industry, but not so much in the policy world. As Mitry put it, “Oftentimes, there’s just a risk aversion. If I [spend] a million dollars with you, and it doesn’t work out well… that’s compromised my next promotion.”

“That mentality really has to shift,” he adds. Currently, decision-makers need “air cover or policy air cover.”

That is the crux of the issue. A paradigm shift may require institutional permission to take measured risks and then scale what works.

Building Canadian sovereignty in sync

Canadian sovereignty may look a bit different from that of the bigger players, due to its smaller size and constrained economy. That process could involve more collaboration and international integration than one might typically expect.

As a nation located next to the biggest market and military on the planet (while maintaining relationships with other world powers), the opportunities to engage and build are there for the willing.

Despite obvious struggles, it appears that exploration into Canada becoming a robust first customer has begun — a giant leap toward moving beyond sovereignty as a slogan.

Building a gold standard for sustainable mining

Mining is not a pretty process. We’ve all seen the sweeping scars on Earth’s surface and read about the toxic ponds and disrupted ecosystems. But mining is a modern reality, and one that supports livelihoods worldwide. In Canada alone, the mining industry employs hundreds of thousands of people.

Concerned scientists are working to ensure that mining remains an increasingly sustainable industry that minimizes its environmental impact.

Canada is helping to lead that charge, thanks to researchers like Tyler Ciufo, who help support the industry with deep geologic knowledge and a sustainable ethos.

Ciufo holds a Master of Science in Earth Sciences from the University of Waterloo and works as an exploration geologist at Alamos Gold, which operates mines worldwide, including in northern Ontario.

Ciufo recently described how his commitment to the environment drives his work.

“It needs to be done, but there are ways to do it responsibly. We need to have a solid reclamation plan and actively minimize our impact. I think about this on a daily basis.”

Tyler Ciufo, Exploration Geologist

Every day, we interact with technology that requires mined minerals like gold, copper, and lithium: from computers and smartphones to solar panels and MRI machines. Minerals like these help keep countries like Canada in business.

Due to our unique geography and location, we rely on natural resources to drive our economy and build a solid foundation for citizens. In 2023, the Canadian mining industry directly employed 430,000 people (in mining, processing, and manufacturing) and another 263,000 indirectly, for a total of 693,000 people.

Balancing economics and environment

Mining is essential, but we know it can come with a heavy cost.

Extracting gold, for instance, typically requires moving massive amounts of rock and soil, which can lead to habitat loss, high water consumption, and chemical contamination from byproducts like cyanide and mercury (if not managed carefully).

Outside of Canada, regulations and sustainable practices are often far less rigorous or nonexistent.

Mining operations worldwide have contributed to deforestation, tailings dam failures, and water pollution, particularly in regions without regulation. From greenhouse gases to mercury emissions that cause worker illness, enormous challenges lie ahead for the global gold mining industry.

It’s therefore no wonder that the need for responsible practices continues to grow, with more than 3,000 tonnes of gold mined annually worldwide. And demand remains high.

“I realized you can work in industry and still bring an environmental and sustainability mindset to what you do… you have to.”

Canada’s approach to sustainable mining: continuously building responsibility

Following the Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) framework, Canada has adopted sustainability as a core value driver of its mining industry. And although challenges remain, Canada is now home to some of the world’s most advanced mining companies, academic researchers, and ESG efforts.

With precise geochemical analysis and advanced reclamation plans, geologists like Tyler Ciufo are helping the industry find ways to strike a balance between economic necessity and environmental responsibility.

Their goal is to help minimize the mining footprint from the outset, while supporting regulatory requirements:

Environmental & Impact Assessments

Before any gold mining project can move forward, it must undergo rigorous environmental and impact assessments per federal and provincial laws. Researchers analyze potential impacts on water, wildlife, air quality, and local communities. Assessments also require public input, including consultation with Indigenous communities. The aim is to make sure that traditional knowledge and land use are considered from the start.

Reclamation Mandates

By law, mining companies are required to present detailed reclamation plans and provide financial guarantees to ensure the restoration of mine sites upon project completion. This involves returning land to its original state or repurposing it for new uses like wildlife habitats or community recreation. Reclamation tasks can range from recontouring the land and replacing topsoil to replanting native vegetation and monitoring the site’s recovery over time.

Tailings Management

Management of mine tailings (waste materials) is one of the most critical aspects of responsible mining. To minimize spill and contamination risks, operators build out advanced monitoring systems and storage facilities. Industry standards, like the Mining Association of Canada’s Tailings Guide, set detailed expectations for safety and environmental protection. With newer technologies like dry-stack tailings and continuous real-time monitoring, risks can be reduced even further.

Water Stewardship

Because water is a critical mining resource, its usage is thoroughly monitored and reported. Water is often recycled and used on-site using advanced treatment technologies like membrane filtration (nano filtration and reverse osmosis). Any treated water released into the environment is subject to strict quality standards to protect local watersheds.

Transparency & Reporting

Regulators require regular reports on environmental performance, many of which are publicly available. Those reports include data on water usage, greenhouse gas emissions, tailings management, and eventual reclamation efforts. Many companies also opt to participate in voluntary initiatives like the TSM.

“TSM requires member companies to annually assess their performance against six protocols focusing on three core areas: Communities and People; Environmental Stewardship; and Energy Efficiency.”

Global perspectives: gold mining by the numbers

In 2022, Canada produced approximately 220 tonnes of gold, making it the world’s fifth-largest gold producer. As of 2023, Canadian mining assets were valued at nearly $337 billion.

Worldwide, gold production reached almost 3,100 tonnes in 2022, with the top producers being China, Russia, Australia, and Canada.

Canadian gold is often labelled ‘conflict-free’ because it’s sourced under robust environmental and ethical guidelines. By contrast, many countries do not enforce strict sustainability standards, and many global operations are linked to environmental degradation and human rights issues.

As a resource-reliant economy with talented researchers, Canada has a unique capacity to develop, improve, and share sustainable mining practices globally. The Canadian mining industry might serve as a model for responsible mining practices worldwide, particularly in developing nations.

“The mining sector is a cornerstone of the northern economy and is a significant customer of territorial and Indigenous businesses across sectors including communications, energy and transportation infrastructure, and commercial services.”

— Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency

The balance between innovation and responsible AI

In 2017, Canada became the first country to implement a national artificial intelligence (AI) strategy, committing $125 million to support AI research and innovation. Since then, Canada has ranked among the top countries for AI research output — and for good reason.

The potential benefits of AI are astounding. But so too are the risks, ranging from mass job displacement to unprecedented cybersecurity breaches.

The global AI sector has attracted over $3 billion in investments to date and employs more than 50,000 people. Its contribution to the global economy is projected to reach $15.7 trillion by 2030, and Canada aims to play a pivotal role in the sector’s responsible development.

However, AI governance in Canada still faces gaps, particularly in the areas of ethics and public benefit.

Led by Dr. Blair Attard-Frost, researchers at the University of Toronto and McGill University reviewed 84 AI governance initiatives from 2017 to 2022. They found that only a fraction of AI initiatives focused on ethics, societal benefits, and workforce development.

Considering AI’s powerhouse potential — with economic and existential implications — the study highlights a widening gap between our understanding of benefits and tradeoffs.

Core findings on AI governance suggest guardrails are needed

The team’s findings suggest Canada should strengthen its governance approach to balance innovation with ethical responsibility.

Strong Industry & Innovation Focus

• The majority of AI governance initiatives focused on supporting innovation, research, and technology deployment.

• Investments and policies primarily target economic growth and leadership in AI development.

Limited Ethics & Social Initiatives

• Less emphasis was placed on developing ethics guidelines and standards.

• Few initiatives focus on workforce development and social services, leading to gaps in responsible AI implementation.

Policy Implications

• Research & Public Engagement: The researchers suggest that more empirical research and public participation is required to improve the sector’s public transparency and trust.

• Unified National Strategy: The study recommends that the country take a more cohesive approach to integrating global stakeholders (government, industry, academia, and civil society) to better serve the needs of the greater public.

The research reveals a need for balance, including clear ethical guidelines and public engagement to determine AI’s impact and its potential tradeoffs.

Why it matters: people come first

Like any healthy feedback loop, checks and balances are needed to maintain momentum while preventing AI misuse and maintaining public trust.

From shifting job market dynamics to warfare implications, the signs of AI’s impact are clear on the horizon:

• Workforce Shifts: McKinsey projected that AI could force 375 million workers to switch occupations by 2030, a global displacement of 400-800 million jobs.

• Deepfake Fraud Surge: In 2022, deepfake fraud incidents increased by 1,740% in North America and 1,530% in the Asia-Pacific region.

• Warfare Concerns: The Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on AI, signed by multiple countries including Canada, aims to ensure AI aligns with human rights and democratic values, addressing risks like autonomous weapons.

• AI Influence: Google holds 89% of the global search engine market, Apple holds 51% of the U.S. mobile phone and tablet market, and Microsoft powers 62% of desktop operating systems. These concentrations have raised concerns about influence over AI technologies.

Although gaps exist, legal frameworks are emerging. For instance, in 2022, Canada’s Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA) became the country’s first legal framework to address adverse impacts and systemic bias within corporate AI systems.

Global perspectives: taming the AI behemoth?

The research team also recommends a global approach to governance, as policy variations can lead to inconsistencies. However, building an integrated international approach will be challenging.

Countries like the U.S. and those in the European Union (EU) have taken disparate approaches to tech governance and regulation. While the EU emphasizes stringent data privacy and ethical guidelines, the US often takes a more decentralized approach that is deeply integrated with the private sector.

Other areas may be easier to coalesce.

Canada’s focus on developing industry and innovation has aligned with global trends. Countries like China and South Korea, for instance, both emphasize AI’s role in boosting technological competitiveness and economic growth.

If ethical initiatives are ramped up, the question remains: how might they be enforced? The UK and Germany, for instance, are proponents of ethical standards but often struggle to successfully implement them across environments.

“By taking this opportunity to strengthen public participation in AI governance, Canada could fill this international gap and position itself as the global leader in participatory AI governance.”

Future in focus: global frameworks on the horizon

Divergent strategies between nations are all the more reason for ongoing public discourse. As the AI sector expands and evolves, coordinated governance frameworks are expected to be critical for fully harnessing benefits while mitigating risks.

Of course, more guardrails mean increasing the likelihood of censorship. Such issues will need to be addressed transparently.

While Canada’s AI governance approach has made it a global leader, the above research highlights the need for a greater balance, with clear ethical guidelines and further empirical studies of AI’s social implications.