I want to be clear on Mr. Regan's amendment in terms of the future of AECL.
Part of the testimony from the officials from both AECL and CNSC was around the future: what the repair money was for, and the preparation. There was a comment, which I'm sure struck many of the folks around the table. I'm not sure who put the question to the witness, but they asked whether they have had discussions with the government about the potential sale of AECL. The gentleman, in his testimony, said he has had no informal conversations. He repeated that particular line over and over again. I didn't have a round of questions left, but my question--and I'm sure it came to many committee members--was what kinds of informal or formal conversations had been held. There was some splitting of hairs around a pretty substantial question.
I could imagine there is a connection between the leaks and the expense being incurred in the current budget to repair Chalk River, and the potential for sale. I could imagine those being connected.
I would accept it as a friendly amendment.