Mr. Speaker, there are several points that need to be made here.
First, the existing wording specifies the Minister of Natural Resources but also specifies "or such member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada as the governor in council may designate as the minister". This gives the Prime Minister full discretion when he or she appoints a minister through whom the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission will report to Parliament. The existing wording therefore contains the flexibility that the NSCA should have.
I would point out to members of this House that both the Minister of Natural Resources and Dr. Bishop, president of the Atomic Energy Control Board, took the opportunity when appear-
ing before the committee to stress the independence of the AECB in regulatory matters. There was no disagreement on this important principle.
I would also note that while the commission will report to Parliament through the minister and the minister will be responsible for answering questions regarding the commission in this House, the minister does not and will not get involved in regulatory decision making.
The government must reconcile regulation with promotion at some level. This is done currently by having the AECB and the AECL report to the Minister of Natural Resources. This amendment would merely transfer the level at which regulatory and promotional interests are reconciled to the cabinet level and hence to the Prime Minister. Why not let ministers exercise the responsibilities that come with their portfolios?
As to whether the Minister of the Environment should be the responsible minister, while environmental protection is an object of this bill, it is not the only or even the primary object, which is the health and safety of workers and the public.
This motion is not acceptable to the government.