Connect with us

Business

BC Ferries And Beijing: A Case Study In Policy Blindness

Published

6 minute read

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Scott McGregor

Scott McGregor warns BC Ferries’ contract with a Chinese state-owned shipbuilder reveals Canada’s failure to align procurement with national security. It is trading short-term savings for long-term sovereignty and strategic vulnerability.

BC Ferries’ recent decision to award the construction of four new vessels to China Merchants Industry (Weihai), a state-owned shipyard under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), is a cautionary tale of strategic policy failure. While framed as a cost-effective solution to replace aging vessels, the agreement reveals a more critical issue: Canada’s persistent failure to align vital infrastructure procurement with national security and economic resilience.

The situation goes beyond transportation. It is a governance failure at the intersection of trade, security, and sovereignty.

Outsourcing Sovereignty

China Merchants Industry is part of a sprawling state-owned conglomerate, closely connected to the CCP. It is not merely a commercial player; it is a geopolitical actor. In China, these organizations thrive on a unique blend of state subsidies, long-term strategic direction, and complex corporate structures that often operate in the shadows. This combination grants them a significant competitive edge, allowing them to navigate the business landscape with an advantage that many try to replicate but few can match.

The same firms supplying ferries to BC are also building warships for the People’s Liberation Army Navy. That alone should give pause.

Yet BC Ferries, under provincial oversight, proceeded without meaningful scrutiny of these risks. No Canadian shipyards submitted bids due to capacity constraints and a lack of strategic investment. But choosing a Chinese state-owned enterprise by default is not a neutral act. It is the consequence of neglecting industrial policy.

Hybrid Risk, Not Just Hybrid Propulsion

China’s dominance in shipbuilding, now over 60% of global orders, has not occurred by chance. It is the result of state-driven market distortion, designed to entrench foreign dependence on Chinese industrial capacity.

Once that dependency forms, Beijing holds leverage. It can slow parts shipments, withhold technical updates, or retaliate economically in response to diplomatic friction. This is not speculative; it has already happened in sectors such as canola, critical minerals, and telecommunications.

Ordering a ferry, on its face, might seem apolitical. But if the shipbuilder is state-owned, its obligations to the CCP outweigh any commercial contract. That is the nature of hybrid threats to security: they appear benign until they are not.

Hybrid warfare combines conventional military force with non-military tactics (such as cyber attacks, disinformation, economic coercion, and the use of state-owned enterprises) to undermine a target country’s stability, influence decisions, or gain strategic control without resorting to open conflict. It exploits legal grey zones and democratic weaknesses, making threats appear benign until they’ve done lasting damage.

A Policy Void, Not Just a Procurement Gap

Ottawa designed its National Shipbuilding Strategy to rebuild Canadian capability, but it has failed to scale quickly enough. The provinces, including British Columbia, have been left to procure vessels without the tools or frameworks to evaluate foreign strategic risk. Provincial procurement rules treat a state-owned bidder the same as a private one. That is no longer defensible.

Canada must close this gap through deliberate, security-informed policy. Three steps are essential for the task:
Ottawa should mandate National Security reviews for critical infrastructure contracts. Any procurement involving foreign state-owned enterprises must trigger a formal security and economic resilience assessment. This should apply at the federal and provincial levels.
Secondly, when necessary, Canada should enhance its domestic industrial capabilities through strategic investments. Canada cannot claim to be powerless when there are no local bids available. Federal and provincial governments could collaborate to invest in scalable civilian shipbuilding, in addition to military contracts. Otherwise, we risk becoming repeatedly dependent on external sources.

Canada should enhance Crown oversight by implementing intelligence-led risk frameworks. This means that agencies, such as BC Ferries, must develop procurement protocols that are informed by threat intelligence rather than just cost analysis. It also involves incorporating security and foreign interference risk indicators into their Requests for Proposals (RFPs).

The Cost of Strategic Amnesia

The central point here is not only about China; it is primarily about Canada. The country needs more strategic foresight. If we cannot align our economic decisions with our fundamental security posture, we will likely continue to cede control of our critical systems, whether in transportation, healthcare, mining, or telecommunications, to adversarial regimes. That is a textbook vulnerability in the era of hybrid warfare.

BC Ferries may have saved money today. But without urgent policy reform, the long-term cost will be paid in diminished sovereignty, reduced resilience, and an emboldened adversary with one more lever inside our critical infrastructure.

Scott McGregor is a senior security advisor to the Council on Countering Hybrid Warfare and Managing Partner at Close Hold Intelligence Consulting Ltd.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Trump announces end to trade negotiations with Canada over costly digital service tax

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

Donald Trump made the announcement Friday, citing frustration with Canadian tariffs on U.S. dairy products and its newly-enacted digital services tax.

U.S. President Donald Trump announced Friday an immediate halt to trade negotiations with Canada, citing frustration with Canadian tariffs on U.S. dairy products and its newly-enacted digital services tax.

Starting June 28, Canada’s digital services tax imposes a 3 percent tax on revenue from “[c]ertain digital services that rely on engagement, data, and content contributions of Canadian users” and “[c]ertain sales or licensing of Canadian user data.”

The Albany Times Union notes that the tax would apply to companies such as Amazon, Google, Meta, Uber, and Airbnb, but most critically from an American perspective “will apply retroactively, leaving U.S. companies with a $2 billion U.S. bill due at the end of the month.”

On Friday afternoon, Trump took to Truth Social to declare, “We have just been informed that Canada, a very difficult Country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products, has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies, which is a direct and blatant attack on our Country.”

“They are obviously copying the European Union, which has done the same thing, and is currently under discussion with us, also,” the president continued. “Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately. We will let Canada know the Tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America within the next seven day period. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

The United States currently imposes a 25 percent tariff on goods deemed not compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the trade agreement Trump negotiated in his first term to replace NAFTA; a 10 percent tariff on USMCA non-compliant energy products; and a 10 percent tariff on USMCA non-compliant potash.

Politico reports that Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney had previously set a July 16 deadline for a new trade agreement, under which it was hoped that existing tariffs would be lifted. Instead, onlookers are now bracing to see what new tariff rates will be.

The tariffs on Canada are part of the Trump administration’s broader series of varying tariffs on most other nations (which have been adjusted, lifted, and delayed at various points over the past several months). Supporters say the trade war is necessary to make international trade fairer and spur a return of domestic manufacturing; opponents argue they increase costs on American consumers and small businesses.

Continue Reading

Business

China still squeezing rare-earth exports despite U.S. pact

Published on

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

Weeks after agreeing to ease restrictions, China continues to stall rare-earth magnet exports, causing Western manufacturers to scramble for critical components and raising fears that Beijing is weaponizing its supply chain leverage.

Key Details:

  • Applications for rare-earth magnet exports are being delayed or denied despite a U.S.-China agreement to resume trade.
  • Western firms report that supply remains critically low, with some forced to redesign products or ship components by air to avoid shutdowns.
  • China’s approval process demands sensitive commercial data, fueling concerns of industrial espionage and political pressure.

Diving Deeper:

Despite pledging to ease export restrictions on rare-earth magnets in a deal with the United States earlier this month, China continues to strangle the flow of these critical components, leaving Western industries on edge and trade tensions simmering.

Western companies say the situation has barely improved since China’s Ministry of Commerce promised to accelerate export license approvals. In practice, approvals remain rare, applications take weeks to process, and many are outright rejected. The bottleneck is hitting manufacturers hard—particularly automakers and electronics producers—who rely on China’s near-monopoly of the world’s most powerful rare-earth magnets.

“It’s hand to mouth—the normal supply-chain scrambling that you have to do,” said Lisa Drake, Ford’s VP of industrial planning for EVs. Though she acknowledged some improvement, she made clear the shortages are forcing operational gymnastics to avoid production halts.

The restrictions stem from export controls Beijing implemented in April, shortly after President Donald Trump imposed heavy tariffs on Chinese goods. While China claimed the license system was meant to regulate military-use exports, the real-world effect has been a sharp drop in rare-earth magnet shipments to the U.S.—down 93% in May compared to last year.

Although the White House announced that China had agreed to resume exports in exchange for reduced U.S. restrictions on certain American goods, the ground reality tells a different story. Export licenses are now limited to six months, and applicants must submit highly sensitive commercial details—such as magnet integration designs and buyer contacts—raising red flags for many Western firms. When companies decline to provide such data, licenses are often denied or stalled for 45 days or more.

“Yes, the export restrictions have been paused on paper. However, ground reality is completely different,” said Neha Mukherjee of Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, citing chronic bureaucratic delays.

Chinese officials claim they’ve approved “a certain number” of licenses, but industry insiders say approvals favor large, state-backed magnet companies. Smaller Chinese producers are suffering under the export squeeze and some are trying to collaborate with foreign buyers to bypass restrictions—such as promoting less-powerful magnets not subject to the controls.

However, these substitutes are often inadequate for high-performance applications like automotive motors, AI servers, and defense systems. Some manufacturers have begun redesigning their products, while others are resorting to expensive airfreight to keep assembly lines alive. As one U.S. importer put it, “These are the things you don’t hear about, how much money it is taking to keep these factories running, you know, limping along.”

Meanwhile, Europe is growing more vocal. Germany’s top industry association recently called on its government to challenge Beijing’s tactics, warning that “licensing procedures must not be used as a means of exerting political pressure.”

All signs point to a calculated effort by Beijing to maintain leverage over the West—despite public commitments to ease trade. With China controlling 90% of global supply for these crucial materials, the U.S. and its allies are now forced to confront a familiar truth: when it comes to rare earths, China holds the cards, and it’s not afraid to play them.

Continue Reading

Trending

X