Natural Resources Committee on June 2nd, 2009

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

The alternatives--

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Have you proposed a--

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Cullen, would you allow the minister to finish her answer?

She wasn't finished the answer. You have to give a reasonable amount of time for a response. If there is a situation in which a witness is stalling, then I certainly allow questioners to intervene, but that's simply not the case here.

Madam Minister, would you continue with your answer?

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Chair, through you, I thought the minister had finished. She had responded to my question and paused, so I went on to the next question. I don't think this is a--

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Cullen. The minister--

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

We're not deducting this time, I assume, Chair, for our intervention.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

The minister had more to respond.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I was just going to point out that I think people in Health Canada would be the best ones to speak to whether or not a medical isotope is adequate, as well as those in the medical community. You received a briefing from a representative from Health Canada today; I can see on the third slide that there are alternatives that can be used in planning, and they are acceptable to the medical community.

Mr. Cullen, I think it's incredibly important that we not have fear-mongering for people in Canada with respect to this issue. We are managing the matter. We are making sure that we're increasing the supply of isotopes on a global scale, we are managing the shortage of supply, and we're working very hard to do so.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

We also heard from your officials that supplies that are some thousands of miles away are a concern in terms of being able to get them to the processors and to the patients who need them. You're counting on South Africa and potentially Australia, and you're suggesting that's the same thing as having something up the road at Chalk River. That is not compatible. That does not make sense with the testimony we heard today.

My concern is that you had 18 months to fix the problem and give Canadians some greater assurance that the cancer they're facing and the stress their families are facing would be alleviated by a consistent and excellent supply. That has not happened. Now we have an indefinite shutdown of one of the major world suppliers. To say this is somehow a global phenomenon and that you were surprised the reactor went down again--one of the oldest reactors in the world, one that's had a litany of problems--and to simply rest upon the ability of that reactor to produce these critical isotopes seems irresponsible. Then you refused to call it a life and death situation today, but in 2007, when there were other reactors up and running, it was a life and death situation, and we had to fire Linda Keen in order to get things back up, because Canadians were going to die.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Cullen, I appreciate your remarks, but how I characterize or don't characterize the situation is not as important as how I deal with the situation. Dealing with the situation means that we increase the global supply of isotopes and we manage the supply. What we call it is going to be a difference of opinion between you and me, but what's important is that we work on it and that we work on it together.

With respect to the NRU, you indicated that there have been a litany of problems. That is simply not the case. I think we should be very careful about the facts we present to committee, knowing there's a difference of opinion.

We are concerned as well for people who aren't able to have the medical isotope tests they'd like to have right away, and that's why we're working on it.

The last point I'd like to make, Mr. Cullen, is that it's quite counterintuitive for you to indicate that the other reactors in the world aren't sufficient for our supply, when Canada notably supplied 60% of the world for a long period of time. If it was good enough to go that way, it's fine enough to come back to us. Any increase worldwide, I believe, is an incredible benefit for us, and we're working together with our colleagues on that matter.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Cullen. I've allowed you some extra seconds.

We will go now to the government side, to Mr. Allen. Ms. Gallant will take the last minute and a half or two minutes, I understand.

Mr. Allen, go ahead, please, for five and a half minutes.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And thank you, Minister, and your officials, for being here today. I appreciate it.

What was so striking in the presentation in the last session we had was the age of the five reactors clear across the world. I found the age of these five reactors just amazing.

As part of the international infrastructure you've talked about, which is much better than it was in 2007, and being the chair of the international group and having recently had discussions with the international groups, what is the most recent feedback you have received from them with respect to how you can fill the gap in isotope supply while the NRU reactor is down?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Allen.

As we indicated, in terms of increasing use, we were lucky enough to speak, as I said, this morning with representatives for the other reactors in the world.

The Petten reactor in the Netherlands has just undergone normal maintenance shutdown and is now operating at full capacity. It can step up production by 20% to 30% and possibly more. The Belgian reactor, as we indicated, is available for extra capacity. As well, the SAFARI reactor indicated that they would be able to increase up to 20%.

Just piggybacking on what you indicated about the presentation before, if you have the slides, slide 13 was the most important, in the sense of showing the age of the reactors currently, but also for looking at the reactors that are coming online. Australia, for example, is ramping up its ability to produce medical isotopes in order to fill the gap, and France too. Those are important aspects to remember.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Given the age of some of these reactors and given that MAPLE was really Canada's attempt to try to put something in place—and we all know that MAPLE went off track, as the Auditor General showed in her analysis, and then in early 2000 it really started going off track until the decision was made to close down the project....

Given that, and given the age of our reactors, was any contingency planning done by the previous government or anybody along the way, in the event that the NRU, with its age...and given that the MAPLEs were having problems? Was any contingency planning done?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

My understanding is that as early as 2000 it would have been known that the MAPLE reactors were experiencing difficulty in operating and being licensed, and the same thing was very clear in 2003. It was between 2003 and...it took until 2008 for AECL and the government to accept the decision of AECL to discontinue the MAPLEs.

When AECL took the decision to discontinue, it was made very clear that they would have to pursue the extension of the NRU licence in order to ensure that we would receive medical isotopes. That's what they did, and they entered into an MOU with the CNSC on that matter.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

How much time do I have left, Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You have four minutes. Ms. Gallant could take the second round, if you'd like to work it that way. It's up to you.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Is there going to be a second round?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Yes.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

So I have one minute left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You have three and a half minutes left.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

I have one more question and then I'll turn it over.

You just brought up the question of Bill C-20, the Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act, coming to committee. May I ask you to comment with respect to some of the things we were talking about—trying to get new ideas, new isotope supplies, and potentially looking at all the options, including medical procedures, and all that type of thing? I look at Bill C-20 as addressing the reactors that we have out there today, which is important to increase the liability and insurance provisions. Do you also see it as having an impact on potential future investment, including investment in reactors that could provide isotopes in Canada?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

I think this bill is incredibly important, and I look forward to the committee's discussion on the matter. In fact, it's so key that it is clear that when certain companies consider actually bidding on building reactors in Canada, they look to make sure there is a nuclear liability act in place so that they have their protections and at least a written establishment of the compensation and civil liability to address damages resulting from radiation in the unlikely event of a radioactive release from a Canadian nuclear installation. That's what the act goes to. Indeed, the bill increases the liability limit of operators to $650 million from $75 million. More importantly, it gives a clear and comprehensive definition of the kind of nuclear damage that can be compensated for.

In terms of an entire package, it is good to modernize this act in order to bring our civil liability regime up to international standards, which may allow us to attract international interest in terms of the global supply of medical isotopes. We're in the process now of exploring different ways in which to produce medical isotopes, and we encourage all kinds of options. That's one thing the expert review panel will be looking at.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Allen.

Ms. Gallant, you have a question or two. Go ahead, please.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Through you to the minister, you made an announcement last week about the restructuring of AECL. How is that restructuring going to impact jobs at the Chalk River labs?