House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2011, with 35% of the vote.
Chalk River Nuclear Facilities December 12th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister well knows that this side of the House did its duty last night.
Since the Chalk River reactor will now be restarted, can the Minister of Health guarantee that Canadian patients will be the first to benefit from the isotopes produced, before the international markets are supplied?
Would the minister guarantee that worried Canadians will not be waiting in line for isotopes while other foreign contracts for AECL are fulfilled?
Chalk River Nuclear Facilities December 12th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, last night, the House had to clean up the government's mess and pull us back from a medical catastrophe. However, Parliament should never have had to deal with this situation in the first place.
Government negligence, pure and simple, landed us in this mess. We have a 50 year old facility in Chalk River, no functioning backup reactor and no guarantee that we will not run out of medical isotopes again.
When will the government get our nuclear house in order?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, the House, just so it is clear, is questioning Mr. McGee's devotion to safety, his good intentions, or his commitment to doing the right thing, but that was not the question. The question is whether, as he works to complete this and restart and get all the pump work done, he will work with the regulator to make sure that he is compliant.
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I would like to follow up on that. Subclause (2) of the bill states:
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited may resume and continue the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River only if it is satisfied that it is safe to do so.
Can we in the House be assured that you would work cooperatively with the regulator on the safety issues so that the public can be assured that you have been in dialogue with the regulator to make sure that when you restart you are safe to do so, understanding the authority that this act gives you to restart under these suspension of licence conditions?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Just so I am clear, Mr. McGee, are you are telling the House that you can do it in 120 days?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I have a question of AECL. Could you run though very quickly why you need 120 days to get the second pump going? What is the technical rationale for 120 days? Can you guarantee the House that you can get the job done in 120 days?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Ms. Keen, just to be clear, would it help you to have in Bill C-38 a clause explicitly asserting that nothing derogates from your authority in respect of Chalk River during this 120 day period?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, this is a question for the regulator, Ms. Keen.
The Minister of Natural Resources some time ago gave an assurance to the House based on a legal opinion that the authority of the regulator under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act would continue to apply to Chalk River in the 120 day period, except in respect of the installation of seismically qualified motor starters on heavy water pumps.
If that opinion was added to Bill C-38 in the form of an amendment that would say, “Nothing in this act derogates from the authority of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission in respect of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited”, that is, if that legal opinion offered by the minister was in the bill, would it enable the CNSC as a regulator to continue to discharge its regulatory duties in respect of the NRU at Chalk River?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, on a point of order. This line of questioning is essentially insinuating that political considerations are affecting the professional judgment of a public servant.
We are here, Mr. Chair, to adjudicate a dispute that AECL quite properly said was a difference of professional opinion.
This commissioner is entitled to the respect of the House and she is not receiving it.
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, if this legislation is before us because we are faced with a public health crisis and the legislation is held to be necessary to get speedy resolution of this to get the reactor up again, is there any solution short of legislation that the president can propose, regulator working with operator under a very short timeline, compressing the timeline to the limits possible, that would allow us to get this reactor started without precipitating a public health crisis?
I am asking essentially, is the legislation necessary? Is there any other way we can go here?