KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

I'm Kathleen Petty, and this is The House.

After twelve years and hundreds of millions of dollars, the nuclear reactors that never worked never will.

PEGGY NASH (NDP INDUSTRY CRITIC):

It's pretty hard to come back now and put Humpty Dumpty together again.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

And it doesn't sound like anyone's going to try. Someone who always tried, and pretty much always succeeded, was remembered this week in Ottawa. We will hear tributes to the man known as "the dean of Deputy Ministers". Also, Canada on the world stage. Here's the External Affairs Minister during the Diefenbaker era:

HOWARD GREEN (EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER UNDER JOHN DIEFENBAKER):

There is perhaps no other nation in the world today in a finer position to give leadership than Canada.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Some argue that leadership is in jeopardy. A former Canadian ambassador to the UN explains the diplomatic dilemma for Canada. Later, Stéphane Dion wants to campaign on a carbon tax. Stephen Harper wants to campaign against it.

JACK LAYTON (NDP LEADER):

... the economy, as Robert Kennedy always says, is the wholly owned subsidiary of the environment...

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Great quote. We'll ask Jack Layton what it means to him and the NDP. Also, you can always believe everything you hear, at least on this program, but you can't believe everything you read, at least not on food labels.

BOB FRIESEN (HEAD OF THE CANADIAN FEDERATION OF AGRICULTURE):

As a start, let's make sure that we're not misleading the Canadian consumer.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Louise Elliott on why you can't always trust those "Product of Canada" labels. But you can trust in having a laugh or two during our "Housecleaning", and you can "Beat The House", Canada's most popular political-affairs program, no Question... Period.

Why throw good money after bad? After hundreds of millions of dollars over a dozen years, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. is scrapping its Reactors MAPLE One and MAPLE Two. Here's why:

GARY LUNN (MINISTER OF NATURAL RESOURCES):

The MAPLE project has never produced one isotope, not one. Information that we have received is, number one, there is no technological solution that is available. We've done a number of tests to determine if, in fact, there was a solution. Even if there was, it would take hundreds of millions of dollars to potentially complete the project; it wouldn't be finished for five to ten years. And so these reactors will have no impact on the production of medical isotopes. This is a business decision. It's in the best interests of the Canadian taxpayer, the best interests of AECL, and the best interests of the medical community.

(Mixed voices)

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

The Natural Resources Minister argues that the old Chalk River reactor - you know, the one that was shut down last year for safety reasons? - well, it can just hang around a little longer and produce those medical isotopes. The opposition isn't too wild about that idea. Omar Alghabra is the Liberal Natural Resources Critic; Peggy Nash is the Industry Critic for the NDP. Welcome to The House.

OMAR ALGHABRA (LIBERAL NATURAL RESOURCES CRITIC):

Good morning.

PEGGY NASH (NDP INDUSTRY CRITIC):

Thank you.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Omar Alghabra, I'll start with you. Hundreds of millions of dollars invested, it's way behind schedule, there's not a single isotope to show for it, so why shouldn't they pull the plug?

OMAR ALGHABRA (LIBERAL NATURAL RESOURCES CRITIC):

Well, I think there are legitimate questions about the future of the MAPLE reactors, no doubt. The question is that... how the government made that decision, and if they had told us that we are no longer pursuing the MAPLE reactors but, you know what, we have a Plan B, we have a new reactor, we have an alternate supply, we have a secure plan for the production of isotope, then I think Canadians, particularly Canadians who had their appointments delayed earlier this year because of shortage of isotope, would be comforted by that, but the fact that the Minister has chosen to cut and run without providing any comfort or any answers to the future of the production of isotopes, with an NRU reactor that passed its lifetime, leaves a lot of questions on the table.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Well, Peggy Nash, I think that Gary Lunn would argue that the plan is extending the NRU, extending Chalk River for another three years beyond its current licence.

PEGGY NASH (NDP INDUSTRY CRITIC):

Yeah, we're left in a very troubling situation now. We know the trouble that not having access to these medical isotopes can create. Much of the world is counting on Canada for these isotopes. Just what is the plan? Are we now suddenly demanding that other countries come in and fill the production of isotopes? Is that what the plan is? Have we contacted anyone about it, or... (chuckling)... are we just getting out of the business of producing isotopes?

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

But do you have any issue with the decision of just walking away from MAPLE One and Two?

PEGGY NASH (NDP INDUSTRY CRITIC):

Well, we don't know what the factors were that went into this decision. There's been no discussion; it was not brought to Parliament; it's released on a Friday, when the House isn't able to grapple with this, of course, and the House isn't sitting next week. Was it the right decision to make? How do we know without the facts? KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Mm-hm. But the point being, Omar Alghabra... is that we don't know that it was the wrong decision. It may well have been the right decision.

OMAR ALGHABRA (LIBERAL NATURAL RESOURCES CRITIC):

Yeah, my point is not whether we decided to proceed with MAPLE or not; my point is the bigger point. Kathleen, you'd remember the Minister at the time in January, or in December, justified the firing of Linda Keen for doing her job because he said lives are at stake, so if he really believes that, that lives are dependent on the supply of isotope, why isn't he providing a comforting or a plan to say, "Well, we're no longer going with MAPLE--"

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

But he has! He's going to extend Chalk River for another three years! So far, that's the plan.

OMAR ALGHABRA (LIBERAL NATURAL RESOURCES CRITIC):

Do you know that Chalk River has a 20-year contract with MDS Nordion to supply isotope? Do you know that MDS Nordion issued a press release saying they were not consulted, and that they're very concerned, and that they're evaluating their options? We may be able to know that the NRU reactor can last two more years. What about after that?

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

But a big part of the problem here is AECL, obviously, right? We're focusing on MAPLE One and MAPLE Two, but AECL's had problems for a long time. The Auditor-General highlighted those problems earlier this year, not the first time, incidentally, that she's done that -- this has been a bit of a rehash over previous reports. Let's just remind ourselves of what she concluded about AECL:

SHEILA FRASER (AUDITOR-GENERAL OF CANADA):

I think many people would argue that it has been underfunded in order to achieve the projects that it wants to do. Certainly we just have to look at the installations. There's a significant defer of maintenance there. One of the important accountability documents is what we call the "corporate plan", where the corporation sets out what its objectives are for the coming year, what it plans to do, the funding requirements. Basically it's a roadmap. In one of the special examinations in 2002, it hadn't been approved for three years. In this special examination, the current year that we're in, the plan had not been approved. Which means that government is not really giving direction to the corporation.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Okay, when government - that is this government, but, Omar Alghabra, that's also previous Liberal governments... I mean, AECL has withered and waned because of a lack of direction and, clearly, financial commitment, so what responsibility to Liberals take for the situation we find ourselves in?

OMAR ALGHABRA (LIBERAL NATURAL RESOURCES CRITIC):

Look, I think it's a legitimate debate to have. I acknowledge that AECL and governments current and past have to share responsibility and a discussion about "What do we need to do?" We are where we are right now, but how do we move forward. I mean, I don't want to minimise the talent and the energy that AECL owns - the staff, the PhDs, the scientists - and they've done a lot of excellent work, but there are issues. In fact, Stéphane Dion, last April, in 2007, called for a blue-ribbon panel to discuss the future of AECL, so he, along with my colleagues, acknowledge that AECL is in need of an invigorated debated about its future, its mandate, and where Canadians expect AECL to go.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Peggy Nash, how would the NDP fix it?

PEGGY NASH (NDP INDUSTRY CRITIC):

Well, Kathleen, you know, it's nice to call for a blue-ribbon panel now, but when this should have happened was sometime back before the funding squeeze was on. It's a little disconcerting to think that an industry like the nuclear industry is not being managed properly, but that's really what the Auditor-General is saying, that past and current governments have not been providing the proper oversight. It's pretty hard to come back now and put Humpty Dumpty together again. I agree that we have wonderful talent. We've produced incredible technical, skilled scientific minds, but if we're not investing to operational-ise these facilities, I think it's very risky when you're talking about nuclear.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Well, you know, maybe, given the recent track record at least... maybe government isn't the best owner of AECL.

OMAR ALGHABRA (LIBERAL NATURAL RESOURCES CRITIC):

AECL is a great potential, is a great potential, but that doesn't mean we don't acknowledge the fact that we have some issues with AECL, and I wouldn't want to jump right away to conclusion and say the only solution is to sell it off, especially at this point, where we need to fix its problems, because if we sell it at this point, we're not going to get its value for the shareholders, who are the Canadian public. So we have to have a national discussion, and I'm not saying public inquiry; I'm saying, you know, scientists, professors, public servants, experts come together and have... and work out or go through the pros and the cons of AECL and the future of AECL.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Peggy Nash, I know you don't like the blue-ribbon idea, but I think, you know, at the... bottom line seems to be what Omar is suggesting is you take the politics out of the discussion.

PEGGY NASH (NDP INDUSTRY CRITIC):

Mm. No, I didn't reject the blue-ribbon idea. We need to decide as a country how we go forward with nuclear, and I do think there's obviously a critical role for government and Parliament, ultimately, but we have some very fine minds in this country, and it makes sense to tap into them. We need to pull our best people together and make a decision what is in the interests of Canadians, and it has to ultimately be decided by our elected representatives, but we need the best possible advice in order to make those decisions.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Okay. Sounds like the blue-ribbon panel's a go!

OMAR ALGHABRA (LIBERAL NATURAL RESOURCES CRITIC):

You know, I think you're right. You see, we've got to take politics out of this. We've got to delve into the issues themselves, the real pros and cons, the advantage, the future of Canada, the future of nuclear, not just for Canadians, but for the world.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Peggy Nash, Omar Alghabra, thank you both.

OMAR ALGHABRA (LIBERAL NATURAL RESOURCES CRITIC):

Thank you.

PEGGY NASH (NDP INDUSTRY CRITIC):

Thanks, Kathleen.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Omar Alghabra is the Liberal Natural Resources Critic; Peggy Nash is the Industry Critic for the NDP. We did ask Gary Lunn, the Natural Resources Minister, to join us, but he was unavailable.

Coming up on The House, do you know who grows your fruit?

TERRY MCEVOY (BEEKEEPER):

This is apple juice. It has "Canadian Choice", which is a grade standard, and I don't know too much about grading apples, but I did call the 1-800 number this morning, and was told that all of this apple juice comes from China.

KATHLEEN PETTY (HOST):

Louise Elliott on the often misleading label "Product of Canada".