Canada’s rejection of BHP Billiton’s bid for PotashCorp on grounds that it did not offer a “net benefit” to Canada, as required under the Investment Canada Act, can hardly be said to be a return to a more protectionist past. It is however a reaction to recent sales of some of Canada’s crown jewels of mining and of the global importance of PotashCorp’s assets.
Canada, as did many countries during that period, responded to the energy crisis of the early 1970’s by creating a national energy company – in Canada’s case Petro Canada. They did this by buying up Canadian assets of companies such as Atlantic Richfield, Pacific Petroleum, Petrofina and downstream assets of BP and Gulf Petroleum. This process, and a period of energy protectionism, was quickly reversed with Petro Canada’s privatisation in the 1990s.
Canadian openness, high by any global standards, reached its zenith in 2006-2007 with the sale of Inco to Vale and Falconbridge to Xstrata in 2006 and of Alcan to Rio Tinto in 2007. The rejection of BHP’s bid is partly driven by a backlash to these sales but also by the size of PotashCorp and its strategic importance. It is one of Canada’s largest corporations and controls 20% of global capacity for an increasingly valuable commodity. An extremely small number of targets will be in this position.
This rejection is very much the exception and not the rule.


