Evidence of meeting #34 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was insurance.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
In fact, it would be the operator's insurer who would seek recourse.
Nuclear Analyst, Greenpeace Canada
The operator must always be insured for $1 billion, but I suppose suppliers must also be insured as that is mandatory.
NDP
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Binder, do service suppliers have to comply with regulatory requirements in order to work in the nuclear sector?
For example, do regulations apply to welders working in the nuclear sector? What requirements must service suppliers meet?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
In the case of a major accident, the commission would not decide who was to pay, but rather the minister or the courts. During day-to-day operations, the operator is responsible for any accident, even if there are service providers.
NDP
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
With respect to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Excuse me, Ms. Moore.
I see the bells are going for us to vote. They're half-hour bells. Can we reach some agreement on staying here and hearing from the witnesses as long as possible?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
How much time should we leave the committee before the vote?
Mr. Trost.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
Perhaps, Mr. Chair, we'll go another two rounds, about 10 more minutes, perhaps?
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
More or less, and whatever we decide, we have to decide it quickly.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Okay, let's do that.
Ms. Moore, continue, please. I'm sorry for the interruption.
NDP
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
After having heard the four recommendations, I feel less prepared to begin a clause-by-clause study of the bill. I believe we have not sufficiently examined these recommendations. It would be more prudent to have one or two extra sessions. We could always come back to it.
Mr. Binder, if I have correctly understood you, someone who provides services to a crown corporation operating a nuclear reactor has no regulatory requirements to meet and is under no supervision whatsoever. No specific regulation applies to anyone dealing with a crown corporation operating a nuclear reactor.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
The reactor must be safely operated, but there are sometimes conflicts between the operator and the supplier.
NDP
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
So essentially, you only deal with the operator to verify safety. You do not intervene with service providers.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
That depends. If something very serious happened, we could compel a supplier to meet with us in public to explain the reasons why the incident took place. Regulations require that an error be made public and publicly debated.
NDP
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Stensil, in Bill C-22, are there any other ways to make service providers liable, besides the one in the amendment you proposed?
Nuclear Analyst, Greenpeace Canada
Given the current wording of the bill, the amendment I have proposed is the simpliest way to make them liable. This is being done in India. We could amend clause 13 of the bill entitled “No recourse” in order to specify the cases in which an operator may sue a supplier.
The current clause in the bill stipulates that “an operator has no right of recourse”, except in cases of deliberate misbehaviour by a supplier. In my opinion that article could be amended. If the bill were redrafted, it could stipulate that individuals could directly sue suppliers. However, as only one meeting has been set aside to discuss this, I will say that the simplest way forward would be amending clause 13 of the bill.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
No, you are out of time, Ms. Moore.
We go now to Mr. Regan, for up to seven minutes.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Let me start with Mr. Binder.
Thank you all, by the way, for being here this morning.
Mr. Binder, numerous Canadians, as you can imagine, have written to the committee, our members' offices, in relation to Bill C-22. One of them was Mr. Chris Rouse of New Clear Free Solutions in New Brunswick. He wrote to my office some time ago and made a submission to the committee earlier in the week to say that he has asked the commission for the definition of nuclear safety and risk used in deciding liability limits—the legal definitions you apply. He claims he's not able to get an answer, so I wonder if we could ask you to provide one. I don't expect you to have it just at your fingertips, but I wonder if it would be unreasonable to ask you to provide it before Tuesday's clause-by-clause meeting.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
In fact, I think we publicly replied to Mr. Rouse. We're quite familiar with his views, and the definition of safety is in the act. It's in our legislation. So it's very readily available.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Thank you.
The next question is that according to the 2014-15 main estimates, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission will receive about $1.6 million more in funding than the amount planned in the 2013-14 main estimates, but $1.2 million less than was actually spent in the last fiscal year, when this year's main estimates were tabled. So the question is, in light of this $1.2-million reduction in the estimates, what impact will the adoption and enforcement of Bill C-22 have on the commission's budget?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
The budget, as you know, is set annually, and it's a function of our work. Of our budget, 70% is cost-recovered from the licensees. So, for example, when Quebec decided to shut down the Gentilly-2, that had an impact on our budget. It changes from year to year, because right now we are dealing with the waste management of decommissioning.
So it will vary, but I can assure you that our ability to oversee the safe operation of a nuclear power plant has not been diminished.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
But will your requirement for funding be diminished this year compared to last? You're going to have $1.2 million less, it appears.