Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 151-165 of 411
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Natural Resources committee  It's $2 per year per household, based on an average consumption. We don't have specifics on every household, but we kind of modelled the average over time.

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  From a policy perspective, the department would certainly feel that it was a stronger bill. The previous version of the bill limited the liability to $650 million, whereas this bill puts it at $1 billion, so there's a fairly sizeable change. This bill has that liability phased in over time, which is responsive to what some of the stakeholders felt was the need over time to be able to get into the insurance market, to get the insurance required, and to put the fiscal elements in place they would want.

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  We expect that the change of the liability amount to $1 billion will substantially change the premiums in the insurance market for the operators. There are only three operators of nuclear facilities in the country that'll be seeking insurance, so the number of operators is small and the community of insurers is small and has to be approved.

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  The insurance premium would be five to eight times what it is today.

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  From a big-picture point of view, it's partly related to the age of the current act that we work under and the limit that's provided at $75 million. The bill really focuses on raising that to be consistent with what would be expected of a nuclear regime, something that's consistent with holding accountable the operators of those installations across the country, recognizing that there is an insurance community that supports those operations and that there's a balance between having a liability amount that's reasoned and one that's economically viable in trying to manage what the cost structures would be and how the insurance would work.

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  I suggest it would be both. I think Canadians in general are committed to the view that operators of industrial activities with an element of risk associated with them ought to be prepared for incidents and accidents, through the design and the operations of their industrial activity, their emergency plans, and all the prep they do in the event something happens, and then the work they do to prevent it.

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  I'll take the fifth on that.

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  I think it's been to committee twice. There's a positive side to that, which is that it's had a lot of consultation, a lot of discussion and debate, and a lot of comments. And we've advanced the bill each time, so there are changes in this bill that weren't included in the previous bill.

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. It's a pleasure to be here this morning to speak to you about the second part of Bill C-22. This will focus on nuclear compensation and liability. This morning, it is my pleasure to provide you with some background about the second portion of this bill.

June 5th, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  Thank you for your questions. I think I have everything noted. For your last question, the bill provides for the indexing of compensation levels. Additionally, the regulatory agencies have the ability to increase the level of financial liability if they determine that it is required on the basis of what has been presented to them.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  If I may, I will answer in English. We haven't suggested that $1 billion is the limit of a spill in Canada. We've suggested that $1 billion in absolute liability is a reasonable limit that establishes what we think companies should demonstrate they have the ability to have and that they would be liable without fault or negligence.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  There have only been three that have been over a barrel.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  Twenty-eight, thirty-eight, and one thousand.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté

Natural Resources committee  That's a good question. There have been a few spills of oil in the offshore. The most significant one was back in 2004 when about 1,000 barrels of oil were spilled in the Terra Nova offshore development.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Jeff Labonté