Artwork for podcast Making it in Ontario
Canola or Automotive: Which Contributes More to the Economy?
Episode 6 • Bonus Episode • 12th September 2025 • Making it in Ontario • Trillium Network for Advanced Manufacturing
00:00:00 00:13:10

Share Episode

Shownotes

This episode of 'Making it in Ontario' unpacks a new data bulletin by the Trillium Network for Advanced Manufacturing that examines claims that the canola industry contributes $43 billion worth of GDP to Canada's economy, more than the automotive, steel, and aluminum sectors combined. Hosts Michelle Samson and Brendan Sweeney discuss the flawed methodology that generated that total, how the Trillium Network generated a more accurate number, and the importance of responsible advocacy.

  • 00:14 A New Narrative About Canola’s Economic Contributions
  • 01:22 Debunking the Canola Report
  • 03:15 Investigating the Canola Report’s Methodology
  • 06:13 Trillium’s Methodology and Findings
  • 10:23 Responsible vs. Irresponsible Advocacy
  • 11:55 Podcast Updates and Reminders

Highlighted Links

Find Out More About Trillium

About the Making it in Ontario Podcast

Making it in Ontario is your window into what's next in manufacturing. Ontario’s economy depends on manufacturing, but the latest research reveals concerning trends that could undermine the sector’s strength—if we don’t address them. Join us as we talk to CEOs and other leaders at the forefront of the sector about productivity, strategy, talent markets and career opportunities, and the role of manufacturing in a prosperous and sustainable future.

This podcast is an initiative of the Trillium Network for Advanced Manufacturing. It is produced by Storied Places Media.

Transcripts

Michelle Samson:

Welcome to Making it in Ontario, your window into what's next in

2

00:00:04,570 --> 00:00:08,799

Ontario's manufacturing sector from the

data driven researchers at the Trillium

3

00:00:08,799 --> 00:00:10,660

Network for Advanced Manufacturing.

4

00:00:11,260 --> 00:00:12,340

I'm Michelle Samson.

5

00:00:12,762 --> 00:00:13,878

Brendan Sweeney: And I'm Brendan Sweeney.

6

00:00:14,578 --> 00:00:18,148

Michelle Samson: Alright, Brendan,

we are going to talk today about

7

00:00:18,478 --> 00:00:21,988

a recent data bulletin that the

Trillium Network for Advanced

8

00:00:21,988 --> 00:00:24,808

Manufacturing produced about canola.

9

00:00:25,508 --> 00:00:25,688

Brendan Sweeney: Yeah.

10

00:00:25,736 --> 00:00:31,921

About the economic contributions

of canola to Canada's economy.

11

00:00:32,621 --> 00:00:35,271

Michelle Samson: This would seem

like an odd choice for the Trillium

12

00:00:35,271 --> 00:00:36,651

Network for Advanced Manufacturing.

13

00:00:36,651 --> 00:00:39,583

Brendan Sweeney: It was an odd choice.

14

00:00:39,853 --> 00:00:45,188

It was really to chime in on a

narrative that's going around.

15

00:00:45,664 --> 00:00:51,088

It was advanced by a number of folks,

mostly in the prairies, including

16

00:00:51,088 --> 00:00:53,138

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe.

17

00:00:53,768 --> 00:00:58,769

And that narrative goes something like

this: The canola industry apparently

18

00:00:58,769 --> 00:01:03,962

contributes more to Canada's economy

than the automotive, steel, and aluminum

19

00:01:04,388 --> 00:01:06,549

and aluminum industries combined.

20

00:01:07,249 --> 00:01:11,539

And these comments are in the context

of ongoing trade disputes with China.

21

00:01:12,239 --> 00:01:14,789

Canada puts tariffs on Chinese EVs.

22

00:01:16,092 --> 00:01:18,912

China puts counter tariffs

on Canadian canola.

23

00:01:19,662 --> 00:01:22,695

And now we've got a dispute on our hands.

24

00:01:23,395 --> 00:01:23,635

Michelle Samson: Yeah.

25

00:01:23,635 --> 00:01:27,115

So I mean, data is Trillium's thing.

26

00:01:27,445 --> 00:01:28,495

It is your thing.

27

00:01:28,545 --> 00:01:30,172

So what did you make of those numbers?

28

00:01:30,872 --> 00:01:32,432

Brendan Sweeney: Scott Moe is dead wrong.

29

00:01:32,848 --> 00:01:41,339

The report that came up with those numbers

is flawed, really flawed, the idea that

30

00:01:41,806 --> 00:01:47,043

that canola, which is not unimportant,

but the idea that canola contributes more

31

00:01:47,286 --> 00:01:52,950

to Canada's economy than auto, steel,

and aluminum combined is laughable.

32

00:01:53,650 --> 00:01:54,310

Laughable.

33

00:01:54,380 --> 00:01:59,150

I mean, the idea, and we proved this

out in this data bulletin, the idea

34

00:01:59,150 --> 00:02:04,260

that canola contributes more than

automotive alone is itself laughable.

35

00:02:04,960 --> 00:02:06,760

So auto, steel, and aluminum?

36

00:02:07,460 --> 00:02:07,820

No.

37

00:02:08,130 --> 00:02:08,940

That dog won't hunt.

38

00:02:09,470 --> 00:02:09,680

Michelle Samson: Yeah.

39

00:02:09,680 --> 00:02:11,360

So how did this get on your radar?

40

00:02:12,060 --> 00:02:14,460

Brendan Sweeney: So after a couple

weeks at the cottage, I kind of

41

00:02:14,460 --> 00:02:18,543

popped my head back up to speak with

a journalist, Lorraine Sommerfeld,

42

00:02:18,543 --> 00:02:20,313

who wrote something for driving.ca,

43

00:02:20,313 --> 00:02:21,003

and that's out.

44

00:02:21,003 --> 00:02:25,173

And that was the genesis of this, so I

credit Lorraine for that because she kind

45

00:02:25,173 --> 00:02:28,883

of told me some of the numbers in our

discussion, you know, something like,

46

00:02:28,883 --> 00:02:31,529

okay, $13 billion worth of canola exports.

47

00:02:31,879 --> 00:02:34,429

$43 billion worth of GDP.

48

00:02:34,819 --> 00:02:35,299

What?

49

00:02:35,962 --> 00:02:37,552

That didn't make sense.

50

00:02:37,552 --> 00:02:41,362

If it was the other way around, maybe

it would've just been high, but it

51

00:02:41,362 --> 00:02:46,392

would've, but to turn an export based

industry, canola, that exports, you

52

00:02:46,392 --> 00:02:51,742

know, $12 or $13 billion worth of goods

every year into $43 or $44, whatever

53

00:02:51,762 --> 00:02:53,742

they said, billion dollars worth of GDP?

54

00:02:53,952 --> 00:02:55,482

That's just not right.

55

00:02:56,142 --> 00:03:03,972

So, we started digging into the data and

yeah, the canola numbers were a bit off.

56

00:03:04,672 --> 00:03:07,532

Michelle Samson: It sounds like

they were more than just a bit off.

57

00:03:08,232 --> 00:03:10,039

Brendan Sweeney: Yeah, they were way off.

58

00:03:10,219 --> 00:03:10,909

Way off.

59

00:03:10,909 --> 00:03:14,819

Like the most off I've ever

seen for these kind of numbers.

60

00:03:15,169 --> 00:03:18,259

Michelle Samson: How does

one get to be so off?

61

00:03:18,959 --> 00:03:22,904

Brendan Sweeney: Well, you use

a really wacky methodology.

62

00:03:23,614 --> 00:03:23,814

Michelle Samson: Hmm.

63

00:03:23,814 --> 00:03:25,314

Brendan Sweeney: Instead

of just going to the data.

64

00:03:25,374 --> 00:03:29,004

Instead of just saying, okay, you

know, StatsCan, tell me how many

65

00:03:29,004 --> 00:03:31,344

people this industry employs.

66

00:03:31,344 --> 00:03:35,244

StatsCan, tell me how much GDP

it contributes to the economy.

67

00:03:35,304 --> 00:03:38,694

Or even going to some of the

companies on the processing side and

68

00:03:38,814 --> 00:03:40,154

seeing how many people they employ.

69

00:03:40,353 --> 00:03:42,984

'Cause they report that out

to the government every year.

70

00:03:42,984 --> 00:03:43,884

We did that too.

71

00:03:44,414 --> 00:03:50,961

So you use a wacky, untested methodology

rather than just using the actual numbers.

72

00:03:51,661 --> 00:03:57,481

And then that just leads to errors

compounding on top of errors, compounding

73

00:03:57,481 --> 00:04:00,951

on top of errors, compounding on top

of errors, and so on and so forth.

74

00:04:01,136 --> 00:04:05,754

And you get a really, really

high number, like $44 billion.

75

00:04:06,457 --> 00:04:09,497

Michelle Samson: So if we wanna

take a generous take on this,

76

00:04:09,647 --> 00:04:10,067

Brendan Sweeney: Mm-hmm.

77

00:04:10,324 --> 00:04:12,161

Michelle Samson: You know, like

maybe dig a little bit more into,

78

00:04:12,161 --> 00:04:15,751

like, how they might have ended

up choosing this methodology and

79

00:04:15,751 --> 00:04:16,776

ending up with these numbers.

80

00:04:17,516 --> 00:04:20,986

Brendan Sweeney: So, one, I mean,

I have to kind of step back and

81

00:04:20,986 --> 00:04:25,126

say maybe they're not as familiar

with the StatsCan data as we are.

82

00:04:25,826 --> 00:04:25,906

Michelle Samson: Hmm.

83

00:04:26,256 --> 00:04:30,062

Brendan Sweeney: Maybe they're not as

familiar with, I mean, the report was

84

00:04:30,062 --> 00:04:32,462

written by a UK-based consulting company,

85

00:04:33,162 --> 00:04:33,282

Michelle Samson: Hmm.

86

00:04:33,712 --> 00:04:38,862

Brendan Sweeney: GlobalData Plc, and

maybe they're not familiar with Canada

87

00:04:39,282 --> 00:04:48,422

to the degree that we are, and StatsCan,

and systems of where you can find data.

88

00:04:48,902 --> 00:04:52,202

Where companies have to report

things to the federal government,

89

00:04:52,412 --> 00:04:55,712

and then in those reports you can

find out certain things about them,

90

00:04:55,712 --> 00:04:57,092

like how many people they employ.

91

00:04:57,792 --> 00:05:00,342

So maybe they just don't

have access to that.

92

00:05:01,042 --> 00:05:06,082

Maybe they did have access to that, and

those numbers seemed a little light to

93

00:05:06,082 --> 00:05:08,812

them for what they were being paid to do.

94

00:05:09,189 --> 00:05:09,699

Michelle Samson: Hmm.

95

00:05:10,104 --> 00:05:12,711

Brendan Sweeney: And so they wanted

to come up with better, quote

96

00:05:12,711 --> 00:05:14,421

unquote, better numbers, right?

97

00:05:14,421 --> 00:05:18,817

They wanted to really show the

higher end, the theoretical

98

00:05:18,817 --> 00:05:21,037

top end of these contributions.

99

00:05:21,127 --> 00:05:26,267

And, I guess it, like, it's so, you

know, when you do these things, is

100

00:05:26,267 --> 00:05:31,857

there a little expectation that you

exaggerate or that you, again, that you

101

00:05:31,857 --> 00:05:35,097

might use the real high end of things?

102

00:05:35,797 --> 00:05:36,247

Yeah.

103

00:05:36,627 --> 00:05:38,807

Do you exaggerate on your CV?

104

00:05:39,347 --> 00:05:40,654

Sure, a little bit.

105

00:05:40,824 --> 00:05:43,311

It's expected, you're expected to do that.

106

00:05:43,341 --> 00:05:48,641

But do you include a career on

there that you've been working at

107

00:05:48,641 --> 00:05:49,901

for 20 years that didn't exist?

108

00:05:49,991 --> 00:05:50,231

No.

109

00:05:50,581 --> 00:05:51,601

No, you don't do that.

110

00:05:51,876 --> 00:05:56,386

I don't know much about dating

profiles, but I imagine you have to

111

00:05:56,386 --> 00:06:01,466

use a photo of you that's of you when

you're younger, because photos of

112

00:06:01,466 --> 00:06:03,266

you when you're older don't exist.

113

00:06:04,074 --> 00:06:04,914

Michelle Samson: Can't argue on that.

114

00:06:05,614 --> 00:06:08,014

Brendan Sweeney: Do you use a photo

of you that's like two years younger?

115

00:06:08,677 --> 00:06:09,037

Maybe.

116

00:06:09,722 --> 00:06:11,786

Do you use a photo of you

that's 22 years younger?

117

00:06:12,431 --> 00:06:13,556

Probably not, right?

118

00:06:13,556 --> 00:06:17,846

So anyway, these numbers

is just a huge overreach.

119

00:06:18,536 --> 00:06:20,246

Threw up all these red flags.

120

00:06:20,336 --> 00:06:26,306

And when we dug in, we just started with,

okay, let's find the direct contribution.

121

00:06:27,186 --> 00:06:33,472

And we found for automotive, it's

like well over 100,000 direct jobs,

122

00:06:34,172 --> 00:06:39,122

and that's in vehicle assembly

and parts manufacturing, and $18,

123

00:06:39,122 --> 00:06:41,842

$19 billion worth of GDP directly.

124

00:06:41,962 --> 00:06:44,102

Before we put multipliers onto it.

125

00:06:44,802 --> 00:06:48,812

When we did that for canola, it was

about, you know, we took the two

126

00:06:48,812 --> 00:06:50,882

main value adding sides of canola.

127

00:06:51,582 --> 00:06:54,342

Not the indirect, not the

supply chain benefits, but the

128

00:06:54,342 --> 00:06:55,842

two main value adding sides.

129

00:06:55,842 --> 00:06:57,822

So we're doing an apples

to apples kind of thing.

130

00:06:58,522 --> 00:07:01,292

The crop production I think was about $4.5

131

00:07:01,312 --> 00:07:02,212

billion dollars.

132

00:07:02,242 --> 00:07:02,602

Okay.

133

00:07:02,942 --> 00:07:03,482

That's a lot.

134

00:07:03,802 --> 00:07:09,002

And the processing, 14 plants

in Canada, including one in

135

00:07:09,002 --> 00:07:10,562

Hamilton, including one in Windsor.

136

00:07:11,262 --> 00:07:16,672

So 14 processing facilities in Canada,

about like 1,500 employees, and maybe

137

00:07:17,042 --> 00:07:20,296

$500 million contributions to to GDP.

138

00:07:20,321 --> 00:07:26,511

So combined, you're looking at like $5

billion, and, you know, 22,000 employees.

139

00:07:26,721 --> 00:07:27,446

Michelle Samson: Big difference.

140

00:07:27,796 --> 00:07:31,066

Brendan Sweeney: Well, I mean, there is

a difference between those activities

141

00:07:31,766 --> 00:07:33,716

and the total economic impact.

142

00:07:33,836 --> 00:07:42,966

But going from $5 billion to $43

billion in GDP, and going from 22,000

143

00:07:42,966 --> 00:07:44,946

employees to 200,000 employees?

144

00:07:45,646 --> 00:07:48,969

That's just not, that's not real.

145

00:07:49,669 --> 00:07:52,703

Michelle Samson: Putting my economic

development hat on, you know, it's always

146

00:07:52,703 --> 00:07:58,253

nice when you have larger numbers to

report or you can say that your economy or

147

00:07:58,253 --> 00:08:00,413

this particular sector is really strong.

148

00:08:00,803 --> 00:08:07,844

But that being used in a marketing

context, while still not right and

149

00:08:07,844 --> 00:08:12,644

not good if it's so inflated, this

gets really dangerous when it's in

150

00:08:12,731 --> 00:08:15,101

an advocacy point of view, right?

151

00:08:15,611 --> 00:08:18,381

Brendan Sweeney: Yeah, and I mean

it's, well, when it's disingenuous.

152

00:08:18,793 --> 00:08:25,034

I think that, you know, if I am Premier

Moe, I'm having a conversation with a

153

00:08:25,034 --> 00:08:30,324

number of people right now, including

my staff, any economist that I have on

154

00:08:30,324 --> 00:08:36,063

staff, and including the people who put

this report in front of me, who put these

155

00:08:36,063 --> 00:08:39,594

numbers in front of me, and saying like,

Guys, you're making me look dumb here.

156

00:08:40,294 --> 00:08:46,704

And at a time when we're

trying to come together as one

157

00:08:46,704 --> 00:08:49,624

country, this is not helping.

158

00:08:49,774 --> 00:08:54,631

But I mean, Scott Moe didn't help himself

by comparing the canola, I mean he kind

159

00:08:54,631 --> 00:09:00,034

of started it, right, comparing the canola

thing to automotive, steel, and aluminum.

160

00:09:00,734 --> 00:09:05,229

And, you know, I think back to some

of the conversations we had with David

161

00:09:05,229 --> 00:09:10,324

Adams of Global Automakers of Canada

where he talked about what industry

162

00:09:10,324 --> 00:09:17,397

associations do, and sometimes what

they do with Trillium, and that's,

163

00:09:17,397 --> 00:09:18,727

you know, do some of this research.

164

00:09:19,367 --> 00:09:22,687

One of the reasons is that, you know,

a lot of industry associations, they'll

165

00:09:22,687 --> 00:09:26,677

get someone like us to do the work

because they just don't have the capacity

166

00:09:26,677 --> 00:09:28,417

to do it or the expertise to do it.

167

00:09:28,701 --> 00:09:29,001

Michelle Samson: Yeah.

168

00:09:29,167 --> 00:09:34,741

Brendan Sweeney: And similarly, they

increasingly rely on us, just as

169

00:09:34,741 --> 00:09:39,421

governments rely on them for this kind

of work because a lot of governments

170

00:09:39,421 --> 00:09:43,391

don't necessarily have the resources

or the capabilities to do that.

171

00:09:43,421 --> 00:09:46,621

Or even if they do, I mean, we

know that the federal government

172

00:09:46,621 --> 00:09:48,491

has certain capabilities.

173

00:09:49,191 --> 00:09:51,290

They want to make sure

things kind of line up.

174

00:09:52,021 --> 00:09:55,201

They want to do the report, then have

an independent third party do the

175

00:09:55,201 --> 00:09:59,411

report and just make sure that they're

within within a certain tolerance range.

176

00:09:59,876 --> 00:10:00,326

Michelle Samson: Right.

177

00:10:00,491 --> 00:10:02,771

Brendan Sweeney: And I think in

this case, you know, in early

178

00:10:02,771 --> 00:10:07,470

conversations with stakeholders,

there were a lot of comments to us

179

00:10:07,540 --> 00:10:08,930

kind of like, Yeah, I looked at that.

180

00:10:08,930 --> 00:10:11,050

I don't know how they came

up with those numbers.

181

00:10:11,050 --> 00:10:14,910

So thank you for adding

a corrective to this,

182

00:10:14,988 --> 00:10:15,388

Michelle Samson: Hmm.

183

00:10:15,600 --> 00:10:18,555

Brendan Sweeney: because we didn't

think it was right, but it wasn't

184

00:10:18,575 --> 00:10:21,535

really our space to call them out on it.

185

00:10:21,595 --> 00:10:22,375

It was not.

186

00:10:22,375 --> 00:10:28,648

So anyway, this is where I think we need

to, whether it's today, whether it's

187

00:10:28,648 --> 00:10:32,308

tomorrow, whether it's down the road,

engage in conversations about, okay,

188

00:10:32,308 --> 00:10:36,658

well what does advocacy look like and

what does responsible advocacy look like?

189

00:10:37,048 --> 00:10:37,588

Michelle Samson: Hmm.

190

00:10:37,728 --> 00:10:42,548

Brendan Sweeney: Because what I think,

you know, I think why we are here is

191

00:10:42,831 --> 00:10:45,441

because of irresponsible advocacy.

192

00:10:45,671 --> 00:10:51,811

I think I'd call it lavish exaggeration

that went unchecked at every stage.

193

00:10:52,601 --> 00:10:58,872

And we have at the Trillium Network

not only been there to do that kind

194

00:10:58,872 --> 00:11:03,012

of research, that economic impact

research, but also help stakeholders,

195

00:11:03,052 --> 00:11:05,812

help governments make sense of

something somebody else wrote,

196

00:11:06,182 --> 00:11:07,592

and they'll engage us to do that.

197

00:11:07,975 --> 00:11:10,795

But this one, this particular

data bulletin, just for the

198

00:11:10,795 --> 00:11:12,815

record, nobody paid for it.

199

00:11:12,845 --> 00:11:13,775

Nobody commissioned it.

200

00:11:14,385 --> 00:11:14,895

Michelle Samson: Mmm.

201

00:11:14,955 --> 00:11:18,645

Brendan Sweeney: I mean, we just

wrote it because that's what we do.

202

00:11:18,792 --> 00:11:19,092

Michelle Samson: Yeah.

203

00:11:19,372 --> 00:11:22,972

Brendan Sweeney: And last week it started

making the rounds on a couple media

204

00:11:22,972 --> 00:11:29,275

outlets, links in the show notes, and, you

know, haven't had much of a response from

205

00:11:29,275 --> 00:11:31,825

the folks, the canola stakeholders yet.

206

00:11:31,925 --> 00:11:37,899

A couple kind of prepackaged comments

that frankly were a bit trite, and just

207

00:11:37,899 --> 00:11:43,669

repeated what they did, where what we were

saying was what they did was inaccurate.

208

00:11:44,476 --> 00:11:47,719

Michelle Samson: Yeah, so we're

recording this a few days early, but,

209

00:11:47,719 --> 00:11:51,439

you know, if there are any updates

between the time of recording and

210

00:11:51,711 --> 00:11:54,576

when this is published, we'll include

that in the show notes as well.

211

00:11:55,236 --> 00:11:55,466

Brendan Sweeney: Hmm.

212

00:11:55,976 --> 00:12:03,327

And also I'd just like to say, response

to our episode last week with Norman

213

00:12:03,327 --> 00:12:05,880

Wickboldt of PowerCo, it was just great.

214

00:12:06,090 --> 00:12:10,544

And, hey, maybe credit to us for

being the first with a full length

215

00:12:10,544 --> 00:12:13,424

podcast with PowerCo Canada so far.

216

00:12:13,484 --> 00:12:15,174

So, that's awesome.

217

00:12:15,174 --> 00:12:19,427

And a reminder that if you wanna

meet some of the folks from PowerCo,

218

00:12:19,427 --> 00:12:22,457

they're sponsoring the St.Thomas

219

00:12:22,657 --> 00:12:24,927

Octoberfest in downtown St.

220

00:12:24,927 --> 00:12:26,337

Thomas in about a week's time.

221

00:12:26,427 --> 00:12:27,297

Links in the show notes.

222

00:12:27,647 --> 00:12:29,142

Michelle Samson: See you there with, uh...

223

00:12:29,765 --> 00:12:30,375

Brendan Sweeney: Lederhosen?

224

00:12:30,935 --> 00:12:31,445

Michelle Samson: Yes.

225

00:12:31,535 --> 00:12:32,395

Lederhosen!

226

00:12:32,455 --> 00:12:32,695

Brendan Sweeney: Lederhosen.

227

00:12:33,572 --> 00:12:34,562

Which one though?

228

00:12:34,562 --> 00:12:38,249

Which lederhosen do I wear

for a September Octoberfest?

229

00:12:38,715 --> 00:12:39,515

Tough decision.

230

00:12:39,580 --> 00:12:41,200

Michelle Samson: You'll have

to just head over to St.

231

00:12:41,200 --> 00:12:43,750

Thomas to find out what

Brendan is wearing.

232

00:12:49,327 --> 00:12:52,837

New episodes of Making it in

Ontario are published weekly.

233

00:12:53,265 --> 00:12:57,675

Follow us now on Apple Podcasts or

Spotify to make sure you don't miss any.

234

00:12:58,243 --> 00:13:01,423

Making it in Ontario is an

initiative of the Trillium Network

235

00:13:01,423 --> 00:13:02,863

for Advanced Manufacturing.

236

00:13:03,344 --> 00:13:05,714

It is produced by Storied Places Media.

Chapters

Video

More from YouTube