Without sovereign digital infrastructure, we risk losing control over our own data and decisions.

Seventy Canadian leaders recently wrote to Prime Minister Mark Carney urging him to safeguard the country’s “digital sovereignty.” The letter made headlines across Canadian media. But for those of us in the geospatial industry, it was confirmation of what we have been saying for months.

And the proof is already here. Just last month, Microsoft admitted that U.S. law takes precedence over Canadian sovereignty when it comes to data. This means that if your information is sitting with an American provider, U.S. law can still reach it, even when the servers are physically in Canada.

That alone should make clear how serious the stakes are.

Yet Canada has never even defined what “digital sovereignty” or “security” should mean in practice — let alone acknowledged the scale of the threat. Without that clarity, the natural result has been an overreliance on external providers to fill the gap. They aren’t the issue in themselves; the failure lies in Ottawa’s unwillingness to set the rules for how Canadian sovereignty should be protected.

We have been talking about this for a long time — in our events, in our articles, and in countless conversations with the community. Digital sovereignty was the central theme of GeoIgnite 2025, where I opened with a keynote that asked Canadians to confront some uncomfortable truths about our place in the digital world.

It has been the focus of multiple editorials in GoGeomatics. And it was reflected in our community survey, where participants ranked sovereign data infrastructure as the top priority for Canada’s geospatial future.

The truth is simple: Canada cannot afford to outsource its digital future. Yet that’s exactly what we are doing.

At GeoIgnite, I asked three questions that go to the heart of sovereignty in the digital age:

• Where does our data live?
• Who actually controls the infrastructure behind our economy, our defence, and our daily lives?
• And are we really ready to hand over control of systems so central to Canada’s future and let them be governed elsewhere?

These, at their core, are sovereignty questions. In a world this volatile and competitive, digital dependence leaves Canada far too exposed.

Data Without Borders = Sovereignty Without Borders

The core of the problem is that far too much of Canada’s most critical data — whether government, infrastructure, or personal information — is stored and processed by foreign providers under laws we do not control.

In our earlier article Sovereign Data Infrastructure: What It Is and Why It’s Critical for Canada, we explained why sovereignty without control of data is sovereignty in name only. The U.S. CLOUD Act makes this painfully clear. It gives American authorities the right to access data held by U.S.-based cloud providers.

That means Canadian government records, health databases, infrastructure models, or even sensitive contracts can be drawn into foreign legal processes without Canadian oversight.

If you thought storing data on “Canadian soil” kept it safe, think again.

Canada’s Blind Spot

This vulnerability goes far beyond cloud storage. It cuts into the core of our national posture.

As we argued in Taking Control of Canada’s Digital Sovereignty with Open Source GIS, Canada has locked itself into proprietary systems that restrict what we can do with our own data. Licensing terms and access conditions are dictated elsewhere, leaving little room to adapt these tools to Canadian needs.

Nowhere is this short-sightedness more dangerous than in national security. In Geospatial Infrastructure: Canada’s Defence Strategy Ignores a Critical Layer, we showed how Ottawa’s planning has a glaring omission. The front lines of security today run through data centres, satellite feeds, and geospatial platforms as surely as they do through airfields and shipyards. Without sovereign control of those systems, any defence strategy is built on sand.

Instead of treating digital and geospatial infrastructure as strategic, we’ve treated it as an afterthought — accepting terms set elsewhere and giving up the flexibility to adapt systems to Canadian needs. Piece by piece, we have surrendered our ability to shape the digital infrastructure we rely on, and told ourselves it didn’t matter.

But if we’re serious about reversing course, we need more than warnings. We need a plan.

Charting A Realistic Course

Charting that plan won’t be simple. Canada isn’t going to cut off foreign vendors or build a fully sovereign digital infrastructure overnight — nor should it try. What’s needed is a long-term national project, one that unfolds over years with clear priorities, steady investment, and the active involvement of Canadian industry. The first step is recognizing this reality: digital sovereignty is not about exclusion, but about direction — committing to build the capacity, safeguards, and governance that keep critical systems under Canadian control.

Part of that strategy is knowing how to balance open-source and proprietary technology. Open standards and open-source tools should be the backbone wherever possible, because they reduce lock-in and keep control in Canadian hands. But we also have to be realistic: proprietary systems will remain part of the mix. The goal isn’t to eliminate them — that’s neither practical nor desirable — but to adopt them on Canadian terms, with safeguards in place so they don’t compromise sovereignty or put government data permanently under foreign control.

And here the responsibility lies squarely with Ottawa. The government must lead by defining what “sovereignty” and “security” mean in the digital age, setting out where open-source should be prioritized, where proprietary tools are acceptable, and how both fit into a wider national strategy.

Others Are Building

It doesn’t have to stay this way. Across Europe, governments have put digital sovereignty at the top of their agendas. France saw the writing on the wall more than a decade ago and put real money into open-source GIS and sovereign infrastructure, betting that control over data and platforms would define the century ahead. Europe launched the Gaia-X project, a pan-European initiative to give nations and industries more control over their data and cloud services. The European Union has gone even further, making “digital sovereignty” a pillar of its industrial policy and linking it directly to competitiveness and security.

Even Estonia, with far fewer people and resources, has still built one of the world’s most advanced digital governance systems, keeping citizens’ data under national control.

India is taking a similar path, reshaping its tech and data policies with a clear push for sovereignty, keeping more of its critical data at home and reducing reliance on foreign platforms. Australia is moving the same way, developing sovereign cloud frameworks and certifying domestic data centres to cut dependence on outside providers.

We Have Done This Before

Don’t tell me Canada can’t act. History says otherwise.

After the War of 1812, Canadians carved the Rideau Canal through swamp and rock at enormous cost — because sovereignty demanded it. In the last century, we pioneered one of the first national digital atlases, launched RADARSAT for independent earth observation at a time when most countries still relied on foreign data, and we built the Canadarm — a symbol of leadership in space technology.

And let’s not forget: Canada is the birthplace of GIS itself. Roger Tomlinson, the “father of GIS,” did his groundbreaking work in Ottawa — work that spread worldwide and changed how governments and industries use spatial data to make decisions.

Our past shows what Canada can achieve when it chooses to lead. In Canada Must Leverage Its Geospatial Legacy to Embrace New Opportunities, I argued that this history isn’t just something to celebrate; it’s a foundation for the next wave of opportunities.

We didn’t ask for permission then; we carved our place on the global stage. So why not now?

The Path Forward

Digital sovereignty will not arrive by accident. It must be built. That means:

• Defining what “sovereignty” means in the digital age.
• Establishing a clear framework for security that sets national priorities.
• Bringing together Canada’s best tech minds and industry to design systems that reflect our own priorities.
• Investing in sovereign data infrastructure so Canadian information isn’t governed abroad.
• Supporting Canadian innovation at scale — not just pilots, but long-term programs that create a true ecosystem.
• Adopting open standards and open-source tools where possible, while using proprietary systems only with safeguards to prevent loss of control.
• Phasing the plan by identifying the most critical systems and datasets, securing them first, and then expanding outward step by step.
• Treating digital infrastructure as strategic — every bit as vital as energy, transport, and defence.

Anything less will leave Canada sliding further into dependence, not sovereignty.

Will We Build Again?

The Rideau Canal was built for a different century’s threat. Today, the threat is digital — and the stakes are just as high.

Canada has the talent, the technology, and the history. What we need now is the political will to turn those strengths into a sovereign future.

The time for debate is over. Ottawa cannot keep outsourcing our future to foreign providers and calling it strategy. If we don’t build sovereign digital infrastructure here, it will be built elsewhere — and Canada will be left dependent and voiceless.

Prime Minister Carney and his government must decide: Will Canada keep drifting, or finally invest in the infrastructure of its own independence?

The question I asked at GeoIgnite still hangs in the air, but it now belongs squarely on the desk of Canada’s leaders: Will we build again?