May 05, 2026 | Category: Published Articles

(Published in the Journal of Commerce)

Canada Must Get Serious About Trade Diversification

Canada has long discussed trade diversification, but has not consistently organized for it. To move beyond slogans and achieve true economic resilience and prosperity, Canada should establish a unified national strategy, set clear diversification targets, and foster sustained collaboration among governments, industry, and trade infrastructure partners responsible for moving Canadian goods to market.

Shifting from rhetoric to execution matters as the external environment is becoming more complex. For decades, Canada has relied heavily on the US as its principal trading partner. That relationship remains vital and deeply integrated, but supply chain shocks, geopolitical tensions and volatile trade policy expose the risks of over-concentration. Across Canada’s exporters and freight transportation sector, there is growing recognition that reducing that risk will require more than ambition. To address these risks, Canada should prioritize coordinated investment in infrastructure, regulatory alignment across jurisdictions, and targeted trade-enablement policies.

Earlier this year, Prime Minister Mark Carney used the metaphor “taking the sign out of the window” to describe a more open, outward-looking Canada. While it was a powerful image, signaling intent is not the same as executing a strategy. Trade diversification is not achieved by rhetoric or trade agreements alone, but by building systems that enable Canadian producers to access global markets reliably, competitively, and at scale.

That is why the recently announced memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) and Global Container Terminals (GCT) matters. It should not be seen as a narrow port story or simply as an agreement between two organizations. It signals a more integrated approach to delivering nationally significant trade infrastructure.

The proposed collaboration to advance Roberts Bank Terminal 2 (RBT2) reflects something Canada has too often lacked: alignment between public mandate, long-term system planning, operational expertise, and investment capacity. That matters far beyond British Columbia’s Lower Mainland. If Canada wants producers in the Prairies, in the North and across the West to expand into Indo-Pacific, European and other non-US markets, then the transportation system cannot remain a patchwork of disconnected decisions, fragmented approvals and recurring bottlenecks. It must function as a network.

RBT2 is not just another project on a list. It has been identified by transportation leaders as one of the key trade-enabling investments needed to maintain export capacity, improve system reliability and support long-term trade growth. More importantly, the VFPA-GCT partnership points to a delivery model Canada needs more of, in which institutions align on execution rather than operate in parallel silos.

Transport leaders seeking project execution, not promises

In a country where major infrastructure projects are often slowed by fragmented planning, uncertain sequencing, and prolonged approvals, such alignment is not incidental. It is strategic, and it is not just about containers or one terminal. It is about whether Canada is prepared to treat trade diversification as a systemic challenge. Ports matter. Rail capacity matters. Inland terminals matter. First-mile and last-mile connections matter. Regulatory timelines matter. So does the ability of governments, infrastructure owners, carriers, terminals, and shippers to work from a shared understanding of priorities. When those elements are misaligned, congestion, delay and lost competitiveness follow. When they are aligned, the entire network performs better.

Recent findings from the Western Transportation Advisory Council’s Compass Survey of transportation executives reinforce this point. Transportation leaders are not seeking abstract policy promises, but execution. The survey found strong alignment around three key recommendations: invest in trade-enabling infrastructure, ensure corridor reliability, and remove chokepoints. Among these, infrastructure investment was identified as the single-most-impactful government lever for reducing trade risk. The message is straightforward: Canada knows much of what needs to be done. The real test is whether it can deliver.

This focus on execution is also why the VFPA-GCT MOU matters nationally. If it shifts RBT2 from prolonged debate to integrated delivery, it will do more than expand container capacity. It will demonstrate that Canada can still bring together the institutions, skills and capital required to execute projects vital to the national economy. It will show that collaboration can unlock efficiencies, reduce duplication and boost the nation’s competitiveness.

Canada’s challenge is now delivery, not diagnosis. That is what makes the VFPA-GCT partnership so important. It is not the full solution, but it models the institutional alignment Canada needs: focusing on execution, not just intent.

Trade diversification is not a slogan; it is a system. For that system to work, collaboration cannot be an afterthought. It must be the strategy.