Natural Resources Committee on Oct. 21st, 2009

[Serge Dupont]

The review was commenced in November of 2007.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

When was it received by the department?

[Serge Dupont]

There are two things there, Mr. Chair.

There were reports from National Bank Financial, which was hired by the department essentially to provide financial advice on Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. I don't have the dates on which those reports were provided to the department; I could get those for the committee.

This is not, in effect, the report from National Bank. This is the department's summary of the analysis that draws on the reports from National Bank.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

How many reports did you receive?

[Serge Dupont]

I think we received, over the course of the exercise...and there would have been interim reports. It was basically one report and then one supplementary report.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

When was the supplementary report received? Approximately; I'm just trying to get a timeline here.

[Serge Dupont]

No, that's okay.

I would imagine it was around January of 2009.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

So the first report was around August, is that correct? If I recollect from the previous discussions, the first report was received in August. Maybe a supplementary was received in August of 2008, and a supplementary was received in January of 2009? Is that correct?

[Serge Dupont]

If you would allow, Mr. Chair, I'd like to go back and check the facts,

so as not to mislead the committee.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

No problem.

So the report was actually requested in 2007. You received the final version in January 2009. It was made public in May 2009. Is that correct?

[Serge Dupont]

No, that would not be correct, Mr. Chair. I would like to be very clear on this.

In November 2007 the government announced a review. Upon launching this review it hired financial advisers. The financial advisers provided confidential reports to the Government of Canada. These reports are commercially sensitive, because they involve estimates of the value of some of the assets and so forth.

In announcing the next steps in the restructuring, the government did want to provide a sense of the conclusions of that review that would be a document that would be suitable for broader communication and that would not, therefore, have any market impacts, if you wish, and not divulge any of the confidential information contained in the National Bank report.

So it's not that we sat on the reports for four months. We actually had to analyze those reports and come to conclusions with the minister, who then announced that we were moving forward with the restructuring, and at that time it was a good time to publish the summary of the announcements.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

So when did the minister receive the report?

[Serge Dupont]

Again, I'd have to go back to see when, Mr. Chair.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Is this just the summary or is this the whole report?

[Serge Dupont]

Again, Mr. Chair, this is not a National Bank report. This is a summary note by the department that would have been done around the time. I guess it's May 2009; that's when it was issued.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Okay. I just wanted to clarify it, because the timeline here associated--

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

Sorry, Mr. Bains, I was asleep at the switch. I gave you 30 seconds over. We'll have to compensate somehow for that.

Next is Mr. Tilson.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to ask perhaps a very general question. A number of years ago in Europe, and indeed around the world, there was a fear of nuclear power. Perhaps it was because of Chernobyl. I don't know. I expect that was one of the major reasons. Of course, that extended here to North America. But now when you go to Europe that's all they talk about. They're interested in the environment, climate change, energy security. They're worried about the Russians putting a pipeline under the sea through Germany, which is going to take a period of time. Even Sweden, which used to be the greenest country you could think of, is now getting into nuclear power big time. Why? Because they say about wind power and solar power that it's very fine but it's not enough.

What role do you see nuclear power playing in Canada in the future? Obviously all governments, provincial and federal, are talking about it. How do we balance that against the need to protect the environment?

Easy questions.

[Serge Dupont]

I think part of what you mentioned with regard to Europe and some of the changes we've seen there, including from some rather prominent environmental spokespersons, I would say, was that on balance there still would be a concern with regard to such things as nuclear waste. But given the non-emitting properties of nuclear energy, on environmental grounds this was a choice that made sense to assist with the global fight against climate change.

Bringing that to Canada makes sense in the same way. Of course in Canada we're blessed with hydro resources in certain parts of the country that provide a percentage of our total electricity mix in Canada. We certainly have a much higher proportion of non-emitting sources than the United States and Europe and any other place. We start from a better place.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Ironically, Sweden and Canada are very similar. Parts of Sweden are in darkness in the winter, just like parts of Canada.

[Serge Dupont]

That's right.

But for Ontario, historically nuclear has been critical at about 50%. I think the government wants to maintain roughly the same proportion, 50%, which will certainly imply refurbishing some of the reactors, certainly most of the reactors currently operating, and, depending on what happens in Pickering and in growth in demand, construction of new reactors. Obviously two reactors are already basically the object of the current process.

Alberta and Saskatchewan are other jurisdictions where nuclear has been considered, where exercises have been conducted, including consultations of different types.

New Brunswick is perhaps less enthused now, given recent developments on Point Lepreau, but certainly they're thinking as well about clean energy corridors and the potential for exports and so forth. I think over time they may again be interested.

I think over time, yes, nuclear will be a factor in reaching the 90% target of clean, non-emitting electricity in Canada.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Do we, does our country, have a real choice? It is acknowledged in my riding; we're getting into big-time wind power. There's a certain amount of solar power, but clearly the assessment seems to be--and I'm talking about a very general assessment--similar to that of the Europeans, that it's simply not enough. That's together with the fear of fossil fuel--one, the cost of the fossil fuel, and two, what it seems to be doing to our environment.

So I guess my final question, Mr. Chairman, is do we have a choice?

[Serge Dupont]

Again, Mr. Chair, what I mentioned in my introductory remarks is that individual jurisdictions will make their choices. I think they will do that on the basis of business cases. They will look at the financial aspects, the environmental aspects, what is base load versus non-base load. Over time we'll look at carbon capture with coal versus nuclear, what the relative costs are.

I think it is very important for places like this one to have those kinds of discussions, those kinds of debates, to look at the various technologies side by side and see how best they can contribute. Our sense is that nuclear will make a contribution. It certainly will make a contribution in Ontario and other parts of the country, and certainly it will make an important contribution globally.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

Thank you, Mr. Dupont.

Thank you, Mr. Tilson.

We'll go to Mr. Guimond.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Earlier, my colleague asked you about the value of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. Pinpointing a value seems to be a very complicated affair, perhaps even impossible. Based on the balance sheets of the past 25 years, could you tell us how much the government has invested in Atomic Energy of Canada Limited?