Carney’s Gov’t Touts ‘Significant’ Trade Missions—Whatever That Means
As British Columbians contend with a shrinking economic output and a provincial GDP falling behind population growth, the federal government continues to champion taxpayer-funded trade missions as a pillar of economic policy—despite little in the way of measurable results.
Last week, International Trade Minister Maninder Sidhu wrapped up a five-day visit to British Columbia, where he promoted Canada’s “Team Canada Trade Missions” as a cornerstone of the federal Indo-Pacific Strategy. At a Surrey Board of Trade event, Sidhu said these trade missions are “a key initiative… that helps Canadian businesses export to new international markets.” He stressed their “significance” to Canada’s economic priorities.
But while the minister spoke of “ambition” and “significance,” the outcomes remain unclear. No deals were announced. No job figures cited. No investment metrics disclosed.
That hasn’t stopped Ottawa from doubling down. Sidhu's west coast tour followed recent missions to Southeast Asia, where over 150 delegates joined the government in Thailand and Cambodia, as well as Paris. Each destination brings photo ops, press releases, and renewed questions about what exactly the point of these missions is.
A Familiar Pattern
Sidhu’s BC itinerary included a Port of Vancouver tour, site visits to companies like OSI Maritime Systems Ltd. and LNG Canada, a meeting with Vancouver International Airport CEO Tamara Vrooman, and a series of roundtables with business leaders across Surrey and Kelowna. He was joined at one roundtable by BC’s Minister of Jobs and Economic Growth, Ravi Kahlon.
Regarding trade missions, the language is familiar at the provincial level: “building connections,” “unlocking opportunities,” and “promoting sustainable growth.” But as Coastal Front reported in June, BC’s international outreach has consistently lacked transparency. Premier David Eby returned from his second trade mission to Asia in early June. His itinerary included Japan, Malaysia, and South Korea, and he was joined by MLA Lana Popham and Parliamentary Secretary for Trade Paul Choi. The trip was billed as a way to “increase investment, diversify trade and create good jobs,” but, as with previous missions, the province has provided no performance indicators, economic impact assessments, or audits to back those claims.
As exclusively reported by Coastal Front, from 2019 to 2023, the province spent more than $27 million operating trade offices across Asia, including in Beijing, Tokyo, Delhi, and Seoul. The documents obtained by Coastal Front through a freedom of information request were heavily redacted. There is no public accounting system for trade mission outcomes, no clear definition of “facilitation,” and no disclosed methodology for tracking success. Just talking points.
Federally, the story is the same. The Team Canada Trade Mission to Cambodia was billed as “the largest Canadian delegation to visit the country,” but no official breakdown of sector gains, signed agreements, or investment outcomes has been published. As Coastal Front wrote at the time, trying to get a clear accounting of what these missions achieve is like “trying to nail water to a wall.”
Bleak Economic Backdrop
Meanwhile, BC’s economy is struggling. A new report by the Business Council of British Columbia (BCBC) outlines just how dire the situation has become.
Real GDP per capita declined by 1.8 percent in 2024, the second-worst performance in Canada. That followed a 0.8 percent drop in 2023. The provincial economy is, in population-adjusted terms, shrinking. The “economic pie,” as BCBC economist David Williams puts it, is getting smaller.
And the private sector isn’t picking up the slack. The BCBC report notes that most of BC’s economic growth over the past five years was tied to four massive capital projects—LNG Canada among them—which are now winding down. What’s left is an economy propped up by public sector expansion and population growth.
In this context, the continued justification for trade missions becomes harder to defend. They are meant to help reverse stagnating growth and private sector weakness. Yet the province's economic trajectory has not improved—and there is no evidence these expensive, public missions are making a difference.
Familiar Questions
The BC government, for its part, is no stranger to these criticisms. As mentioned, Premier David Eby recently completed his own second major trade mission to Asia. The first, in 2023, saw the province open a new Trade and Investment Representative office in Vietnam. The government declared it a win for diversification and international engagement—but again, no metrics were provided.
The 2023 trip was part of a larger pattern. Between 2019 and 2023, the province spent over $27 million operating trade offices in cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Delhi, and Tokyo. When Coastal Front obtained financial records through a freedom of information request, key details were redacted, and the government charged $480 for access. A similar request in 2018 had been fulfilled free of charge.
Fiscal Conservatism in Name Only?
While the NDP’s trade spending has drawn fire from the opposition, the alternatives come with their own baggage.
The BC Conservatives, under John Rustad, have repeatedly called for fiscal restraint and criticized Eby’s trade missions. Yet the party has embraced former Minister of International Trade Teresa Wat, whose own tenure under the BC Liberals oversaw a costly expansion of the province’s trade office network.
During that time, BC appointed Ben Stewart as “Special Representative to Asia,” a post that cost taxpayers over $1 million in living and employment expenses and was widely criticized as political patronage. Rustad now praises Wat’s “dedication and insight” and calls her a key voice in building a “more prosperous and fair province.”
The result is a political landscape where both governing and opposition parties have track records of big spending abroad, little transparency, and no established system to evaluate success.
A Question of Priorities
Trade missions are not new, nor are the criticisms. A peer-reviewed study from UBC’s Sauder School of Business, Do Trade Missions Increase Trade?, found no statistically significant increase in trade resulting from Canadian federal missions between 1994 and 2005—even several years after the trips took place.
Yet in 2025, the same approach persists. Provincial and federal governments send officials around the world, pointing to geopolitical tensions, unreliable neighbours, and the promise of diversification as justification.
But with BC’s economy underperforming, private sector activity flatlining, and mega-project momentum fading, trade missions continue to be promoted without any proof they’re working.
