That's right.
Evidence of meeting #6 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 clause.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #6 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 clause.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:45 a.m.
Acting Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Department of Natural Resources
That's right.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Mr. Chair, with respect to this, there seems to be a lot of uncertainty around whether this will require a royal recommendation or not, because essentially, if an insurer or an operator has paid out $350 million of a claim and $300 million is still left, then the amendment we're talking about is taking the government's liability from $60 million to $120 million, 40% of that difference. Is that right?
9:50 a.m.
Acting Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Department of Natural Resources
No, it's not 20%—
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
It's 20% of the difference between $21.1 million and the amounts paid out.
9:50 a.m.
Acting Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Department of Natural Resources
Just a second.
Yes, you're correct.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
What that means is that now the federal government is on the hook for an extra $60 million, and complicating that is the fact that now we could be creeping into a reinsurance amount. We could be creeping based on a self-insurance amount we already provided the operator with under previous clauses, and I'm concerned that if something happened there would be risk to the government on this in extra dollars.
Having said that, I only see two options. Number one, I think it's going to take a royal recommendation and I would have to oppose this amendment if I'm forced to vote on it today. Otherwise someone should investigate this so we have a definite answer on this before we meet on Tuesday.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
I need more guidance. I thought I was clear on what the situation was. It seems to me we're talking about an interim payment, and I believe the witnesses had answered at one time that there would be no increase in government liability. Could we get clarification on that as much as possible?
9:50 a.m.
Acting Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Department of Natural Resources
That's correct. There is no increase in the liability. There's no increase. The liability is fixed at a maximum of $650 million. In effect, the government would not pay out $650 million because the private insurance would be covering an element of that--we would expect the majority of that. The government's ultimate liability could only be up to a maximum of $650 million.
9:50 a.m.
Senior Counsel, Environment Canada, Department of Justice Canada
Actually, may I clarify that?
9:50 a.m.
Senior Counsel, Environment Canada, Department of Justice Canada
If we go on to the financial provisions--that's starting at clause 58--you'll see that payments made by the minister come out of the nuclear liability reinsurance account, which is a special account in the consolidated revenue fund. If excessive payments are made—if an error is made, for instance—if there are insufficient amounts in that account, then an amount sufficient to meet the deficit is to be paid from the consolidated revenue fund. At the point that the minister is paying money out, he's paying money out of the consolidated revenue fund or the special account.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
So what does that mean? What does that mean in terms of the royal recommendation issue, to make it clear? It means increasing it to 40% from 20%.
9:50 a.m.
Senior Counsel, Environment Canada, Department of Justice Canada
There is a theoretical increase in liability. It's unlikely. If the amount were paid out, if the minister mistakenly paid out more than was available in that account, then the shortfall would come from the consolidated revenue fund.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
December 6th, 2007 / 9:50 a.m.
Acting Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Department of Natural Resources
No, not really.
9:50 a.m.
Jacques Henault
No, I have nothing to add.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
I thought you had your hand up.
Now we're going to go to Mr. Ouellet on this, and I'm going to have some further consultation with the researcher on this, as well. Then we'll go to Mr. Anderson.
Mr. Ouellet.
9:50 a.m.
Bloc
Christian Ouellet Bloc Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Mr. Chairman, my question was the same as the one Mr. Alghabra asked. It's settled.
9:50 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
I'd just like to make a motion to table the amendment until Tuesday, and then we can have complete clarification on it.
9:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
There's no debate on a motion to table. Mr. Bevington's motion is to table the decision on clause 34 until Tuesday.
(Clause 34 allowed to stand)
(Clauses 35 and 36 agreed to)
(On clause 37—Public notice)
