Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 106-120 of 120
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Natural Resources committee  We acknowledge that it exists. I would suggest that perhaps we would use this bill as the basis for looking at our relations with other countries in terms of liability, but we understood as we are developing this legislation that the reciprocity agreement exists today and is still in operation.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  I think the position of officials is that it would probably be worthwhile to look at that reciprocity agreement to see if it needs to be updated, and perhaps to examine as well our international exposure on nuclear liability and whether we might be entering into other agreements.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  There is only one, and it's with the United States. The reciprocal agreement was an exchange of notes between the United States government and the Canadian government. That was brought into force by regulation. So there's actually a regulation that brings that reciprocity agreement into force.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  In the event of an incident of the United States that causes damage in Canada, we would have access to the United States' courts and their fund for third party damages. Similarly, in the event of a Canadian accident with damages in the United States, their citizens would have access to our compensation scheme.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  The act applies to damage in Canada and the exclusive economic zone. It does not apply to damage outside of the country unless it's under an agreement of reciprocity with that country. There would have to be some form of agreement between the Government of Canada and the neighbouring country in which we would provide reciprocal benefits in the event of a nuclear incident that caused damage in the neighbouring country.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  If they were coming to Canada to make their claim, they would be claiming against the operator, because the courts are directed that.... Our legislation is the legislation that carries in this area, and the only liable entity is the operator.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  Yes, it is the court's decision as to who gets compensation. They would look to the legislation and what that directs.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  We haven't seen the letter that Westinghouse has provided to the committee.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  That's correct.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  No, in fact what the legislation says is that the act is applicable to damages relating to a terrorist activity, and to the extent this may be terrorist activity associated with a nuclear fuel waste management location, it would also apply to damages associated with that. Nuclear fuel waste is managed in a very secure manner on licensed sites today, in pools or in dry storage, and in fact it's subject to the same type of security as the installation itself, but if there were a terrorist attack and if the damages related to the nuclear fuel waste, it would be covered under this legislation.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  No, I have nothing to add.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  Certainly. Thanks very much. The insurance market, under the existing legislation, is one in which we have a group of insurers who have been approved, first by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions as having the financial wherewithal to provide insurance to Canadian nuclear companies.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  Good morning, my name is Dave McCauley. I'm the acting director for the uranium and radioactive waste division at Natural Resources Canada. We're responsible for the policy work and the development of the nuclear liability and compensation bill.

November 29th, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley

Natural Resources committee  Yes, we are an observer. We do have observer status with these conventions, and certainly they have influenced the development of legislation, as the minister indicated, in areas on the definition of nuclear damages and the liability limit. We would be interested in perhaps discussing with Department of Foreign Affairs membership in one of these conventions in the longer term should this bill proceed and enter into force.

November 22nd, 2007Committee meeting

Dave McCauley