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

Results 1-15 of 17
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Natural Resources committee  It would be grammatically correct in the English version.

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  Could I assist the committee?

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  The motion is to replace the first two lines, lines 26 and 27, with the word “When” so it reads, “When a call for public funds is made under subsection 72(1) those funds are to be used to compensate...”. Then (b) says, replacing lines 30 to 32 with the words, “the damage that is

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  You have to track that line by line for this to make sense.

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  Then the paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) continue as they are in the document before you.

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  It would also have the effect of changing the liability limit. Proposed paragraph 24(2)(b) allows that the Governor in Council could prescribe a lower liability limit. As an example, that flexibility is in the bill for universities that have Slowpoke research reactors. The effe

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  I'm just looking at the wording in proposed section 12, which does refer to circumstances amounting to gross negligence. As I understand the policy, the policy of the government has always been that an operator should have recourse against any party who would intentionally caus

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  Yes, that's correct.

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  May I speak to that now, Mr. Chair?

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  The convention that I am referring to is the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage, which is the convention referred to in the definition section of the bill that is before the committee. I am referring to article 3, which is in the annex. It makes clear tha

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  Perhaps as a point of clarification, in the reference I made to international principles, I was also referring to the Vienna convention and the Paris convention, which are defined in the supplementary compensation convention.

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  My response to this would be that in the principles that are included in the bill you have before you, liability on an operator is exclusive. It is correct to say what that means is that contractors to that operator are not liable. This is consistent with the international conv

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  My answer would be that yes, it would have the same effect.

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  The definition of “nuclear installation” in line 10 links to designation under clause 7. To understand the extent of the definition, you have to consider the scope of clause 7. Clause 7 is an authority for the Governor in Council to designate those installations by regulation.

June 10th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman

Natural Resources committee  The legislation provides in clause 14 that bodily injury, death, and damage to property are compensable, and then in clause 15 it's more precise than I think the previous version of the bill that the committee saw was. It provides that psychological trauma will be compensable whe

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Joanne Kellerman