Evidence of meeting #14 for Natural Resources in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was situation.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Professor and Ontario Research Chair in Public Policy for Sustainable Energy Management, Faculty of Engineering and Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo
Again, it's a part of governance that one could think about in the future, as to how we might improve this.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mr. Tonks.
We go now to Ms. Gallant for up to five minutes. Go ahead, please.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My first question is to Dr. O'Brien. I would like to better understand the lines of communication, and perhaps you could remind me of some of the dates and the chronology when the issue became urgent and critical, in your determination--the line of communication both up the chain of command and down through the positions, like radiologists working in the hospital.
At what point, and how, was it signalled to you that there was a problem?
Past President, Canadian Society of Nuclear Medicine
The first indication was on November 27, and that's when at my local hospital we received the official notification from GE Healthcare that there would be a temporary disruption in the supply of isotopes to us. We continued on, adjusting accordingly, because we felt this was only going to be a short, couple-of-day issue, if you will. That's very compatible with what we've heard; the timelines were very fluid.
By Monday, December 3, my own department was getting very concerned, and we started to make phone calls to our national organizing body, the Canadian Society of Nuclear Medicine and the Canadian Association of Nuclear Medicine, to find out, gee, is this just a local event that I'm having problems with, or what's happening across Canada?
By December 5, we had enough information across Canada to state that we had a real problem here, because it was just not local. It was patchy, absolutely, so some areas were less affected than others. So we put out our first press release to state that there was a problem here and that it was having a significant negative impact on patient care, and that at that point we were beginning to ration access to health care in the nuclear medicine environment.
We had no direct communication with government, we had no direct communication with Health Canada or Natural Resources, and no direct communication with AECL or the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. So our only lines of communication were with us and to get the information out to the public.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
When you say you issued a press release, was it on behalf of the nuclear society or the hospitals at which you work?
Past President, Canadian Society of Nuclear Medicine
No, this was on behalf of the nuclear medicine association. These were our nuclear medicine specialists across Canada raising the flag of alarm, that there was a significant problem occurring here.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Then, in turn, what did you or your society do in order to let the small outlying hospitals, which may not have heard of this shortage yet, become aware of the situation?
February 7th, 2008 / 12:30 p.m.
Past President, Canadian Society of Nuclear Medicine
Well, our association put out a survey across Canada to determine what the impact was. We had that information sometime around December 5, stating that, yes, there was a variable impact, and the most significant impacts were, as mentioned, in Ontario, Quebec, and the maritime provinces. With that information, we started discussions, trying to determine if we had alternative resources, how would we move forward, how would we coordinate a response to ensure that our local community hospitals would function more effectively?
We were in communication with GE Healthcare, which is one of the suppliers of radiopharmaceuticals, and with Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is the other main supplier. Those departments that had contracts with Covidien, which is the European supplier, had a more sustainable supply from that point.
We got initial telephone conversations from Health Canada as a result, we believe, of our press release on December 5. On the weekend of December 8 and 9, we started to get phone calls from Health Canada requesting the development of an ad hoc committee. Dr. Gulenchyn was recruited into that initial ad hoc committee. They had their initial teleconferences on the weekend of December 8, 9, and 10, from that point. So it's been through the advisory committee that we now have better lines of communication, both with Natural Resources and with Health Canada.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Thank you very much for that.
Dr. Nathwani, earlier Dr. O'Brien mentioned that the health board at the CNSC had been eliminated when the CNSC came into being under the act. Do you understand why that health board was not included as part of the act or to continue on as part of the board? Was it just assumed that it was included in policy or was there a specific reason?
Professor and Ontario Research Chair in Public Policy for Sustainable Energy Management, Faculty of Engineering and Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo
It is a puzzle to me. I recall—this is going back 10 or 12-odd years now—there used to be the...wasn't it called the Advisory Committee on Radiological Protection, and the medical people were in on that particular committee? That was a very useful group of academics across the country and other people with an interest in that subject, who helped provide advice, anyway, to the Atomic Energy Control Board on such matters.
I have lost track of how that disappeared when we went from the AECB to CNSC. I've lost track of why it got dropped. Although I was involved in some of the review of the amendments to the Atomic Energy Control Regulations and so on, I have no recollection of why and who made that decision.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
On a point of order, it looks like Dr. O'Brien may have an answer to that question.
Conservative
Past President, Canadian Society of Nuclear Medicine
I could answer that very quickly.
Dr. Al Driedger, one of the godfathers of nuclear medicine, if you will, in Canada, was involved in that advisory committee. It got very testy, according to him, in the sense that the information given from the medical community was felt to be a biased perspective, on the part of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, and the commission felt that what we were doing was not appropriate—and it was disbanded at that point.
I gather a lot of derogatory statements were made at that time, and based on those interactions, there was some concern about the reputation of the physicians at that association.
So it was not an amicable split; it was a forced split.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you very much, Dr. O'Brien.
We go now to the official opposition.
Mr. Alghabra, go ahead, for up to five minutes.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Soublière, thank you for coming here. I know you've been sitting quietly here, but there's a real reason many of us wanted to hear from you. You acted as chair for a couple of years at AECL. You have a lot of experience that I think could benefit this committee.
I just want to point out, first, that there was a report in The Globe and Mail that you had been recommended twice to be the full-time, permanent chair of AECL. The first time, we understand, was because an election was called; and the second time, you were not appointed and Mr. Burns was appointed.
Do you have anything to elaborate on that? Can you tell us a little bit about that?
President, Anderson Soublière Inc.
First of all, it was not a full-time position. I was only acting chair for one year. I know for sure that I was recommended the first time through an independent committee, and I'm not sure why I was only made acting chair.
In terms of the second process, the same process was repeated approximately nine months after the election. I was not appointed the second time. I did not tell the press I had been recommended twice; I have no proof of having been recommended the second time.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
By the way, when I said full-time, I meant permanent.
During that time, as chair or acting chair, would you have been involved in any type of regulation or licensing issues with the NRU reactor?
President, Anderson Soublière Inc.
Not really, no. We were made aware, and kept abreast, of what was going on—certainly with the partnership that was being developed with MDS, which was quite elaborate and very positive, in fact. We did meet with the chair, who came to our board meeting at one point.
But no, this was a very official, very legalistic process. No, the board was not involved in this, and neither was I.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
So if there was an extended shutdown of the NRU reactor, the board would not have been notified?
President, Anderson Soublière Inc.
No, I meant in terms of actual face-to-face discussions.
Absolutely, we would have been notified, of course.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
So the board would have been briefed on regulatory issues, maybe not about the details of the process but about the regulatory issues or shutdown issues of the NRU reactor?
President, Anderson Soublière Inc.
I was not there, of course, when this happened. So I can only speculate today. I assume we would very much be kept in touch with these issues. We might not have been told of a regular shutdown, because it was something that was happening, but as soon as there were any issues, they would certainly be brought up to the chair.
