News Sections
Critics blast Lunn for firing head of nuclear watchdog
CTV News Video
Watch: See all Videos in the Player
Font-size:
Share
Print
Comments(138)
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Wed. Jan. 16 2008 6:31 PM ET
Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn said Wednesday he fired the president of Canada's nuclear watchdog because she showed a "lack of leadership," but critics slammed the government for interfering in an independent agency.
Lunn told a Commons committee that Linda Keen, head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, did not act quickly enough following the shutdown of the Chalk River nuclear reactor in Ontario late last year.
Keen was fired late Tuesday night, 12 hours before she was scheduled to speak before the committee.
Liberal MP David McGuinty accused the Conservatives of using U.S.-style partisan attacks to intimidate independent agencies.
"Anybody who tries to do their job around this town these days seems to lose it," he told Lunn. "These are the kinds of Republican tactics this town has never seen before."
Bernard Shapiro, the former head of McGill University, resigned as the federal ethics commissioner last year after run-ins with Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government. And Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand was publicly criticized by Harper for allowing veiled women to vote without showing their faces.
The natural resources committee has been set up to probe the circumstances surrounding the Chalk River closure -- which led to a worldwide medical isotope shortage.
The reactor, operated by the Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL), a Crown corporation, stopped production for scheduled repairs on Nov. 18 and was expected to restart within five days.
But the CNSC -- responsible for setting licensing, health and safety rules for the country's nuclear facilities -- refused to allow the reactor to restart after finding it had been operating without a backup emergency power system for cooling pumps for 17 months.
"The obvious culprit here is the Crown corporation," Green Party Leader Elizabeth May told CTV Newsnet.
She said the AECL was operating in violation of its licence and had failed to anticipate that a shutdown would imperil the supply of medical isotopes, while Keen was simply doing her job.
"Keen was fired because they're making her a scapegoat; she was fired because she did not knuckle-under to a minister," said May.
New Democrat MP Paul Dewar, the party's deputy critic for Crown corporations, said Lunn should not have put pressure on Keen because of her position as a quasi-judicial official.
"The wrong person got fired yesterday, in my opinion," Dewar told CTV's Mike Duffy Live. "The person who should have been fired was Mr. Lunn, who crossed over a line. These are boundaries that are sacrosanct in terms of good governance. For public servants to do their job, they have to do it without this kind of interference."
In December, emergency legislation passed by Parliament side-stepped the CNSC's objections and allowed AECL to restart the reactor for 120 days in order to alleviate the isotope shortage.
Since then, Keen and Lunn have been engaged in a very public dispute over the shutdown of the nuclear reactor.
"The president of the CNSC is a chief executive officer and is responsible for supervision over the direction of the work of the members, officers and employees of the commission," Lunn told the committee on Wednesday.
"At issue was the president's failure to manage the work in order to bring the matter for hearing before the commission in an appropriately urgent fashion."
Lunn said Keen failed to "consider fully, in a timely fashion, the serious consequences of the growing shortage of medical isotopes."
Quick Facts
Linda J. Keen is an Albertan. She received her B.Sc. (honours in chemistry) and M.Sc. (agriculture sciences) from the University of Alberta. After working as a chemist, she continued her career in three science-related fields: agriculture and agri-food, mining and currently, in the nuclear area.
--Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
He said her actions were troubling and that she didn't meet the high standards of the government or the Canadian people.
Keen fired
Opposition leaders have called on Lunn to resign, accusing him of improperly interfering with an arm's-length nuclear regulator.
Following Lunn's statement Wednesday, Liberal MP Omar Alghabra accused the minister of "blatant political interference.''
"I think the prime minister fired the wrong person today,'' he said.
Bloc Quebecois MP Claude DeBellefeuille said Lunn's behaviour "undermined the credibility of the commission.''
The Tories informed Keen that she was fired in a letter sent late Tuesday.
A press released posted on the CNSC website said Keen "received a letter from the Privy Council Office indicating that the government adopted an Order in Council terminating her designation as President of the Commission, effective immediately."
The letter further indicates that she remains a full-time permanent member of the Commission.
In a letter dated Dec. 27, which was later leaked to the media and then posted on the CNSC website, Lunn threatened to fire Keen for her role.
Keen responded with a scathing letter, telling Lunn that "the allegations which have been made, coupled with your threat to have me removed as President, seriously undermine the independence of the CNSC."
With a report from CTV Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife and files from The Canadian Press
User Tools
Related Stories
User Tools
About the tools
Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.
-


Font-size
Print Article
Comments(138)-
Feedback
Share it with your network of friends
Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
I applaud the budget, even though Health Care and education may stay unscathed. Sadly this cannot last and I worry to later this year where cuts will become enviable. If anything, this provides the Wildrose Alliance plenty of ammo when an election is called.


Please Add Comments( )
Stephen
0
said
0
Bob
0
said
0
J. Fletcher
0
said
0
nosty
0
said
0
David
0
said
0
Greg
0
said
0
David
0
said
0
She didn't. She still doesn't understand that. She needs to be fired.
James
0
said
0
Tim
0
said
0
Bob
0
said
0
Ian
0
said
0
Robert, Montreal
0
said
0
It is clear that the fault lies squarely on the shoulders of AECL management who knew they weren't in compliance with their licence. AECL made the decision to shut down to correct a potentially dangerous equipment non-conformance. When the shut down needed to be extended to complete the work and threatened supplies AECL did not submit the documentation required by law for the CNSC to act.
So for doing her job Ms. Keen gets brow beaten in a letter. For responding in a professional manner to what was a very distasteful example of ministerial penmanship and showing us all that the Minister of Natural Resources had clearly overstepped his bounds in his mishandling of the situation, Ms. Keen gets fired. Clearly, this is so wrong. She deserves better and so do Canadians. I for one have no confidence in Mr. Lunn's suitability to hold higher office. Canadians need leaders not messenger shooters. Mr. Lunn should atleast have the moral courage to resign, but that's probably asking too much of the man.
JE
0
said
0
Thomas from Halifax
0
said
0
Get it straight
0
said
0
It's painfully clear that the government fired the wrong person, but that's not surprising. After badgering the Liberals for punishing those that don't toe the party line, Harper continues to get rid of those who question his authority. Can you say 'democracy'? Not if you're a Conservative.
Mark Fort Erie ON
0
said
0
d
0
said
0
Frunk36
0
said
0
GATES
0
said
0
Mario
0
said
0
Paul
0
said
0
Matt
0
said
0
I
0
said
0
DANIEL
0
said
0
Victor
0
said
0
These are not political battles, and to make it so speaks to the integrity of governments and oppositions.
Do things right and stop wasting tax payer money and putting people at risk, is what the electorate want.
What do you have to do to get good public servants around here ?
Nuclear Norm
0
said
0
Hassan
0
said
0
Chri
0
said
0
Phil
0
said
0
Robert, Montreal
0
said
0
The regulator's job is to abide by existing law and not to find creative ways to flout it. Lunn fired Keen simply because she wouldn't break the law and he and AECL management ended up looking like idiots. Well if the shoe fits.....
Paul in B.C.
0
said
0
David B.
0
said
0
Henry Wysmulek
0
said
0
Now maybe these arrogant self-serving Civil Servants will realize that the ELECTED Government runs the country.
Frank
0
said
0
Ellis
0
said
0
It has been my experience tha even insurance companies will raise a loud cry in this situation.
Certainly the chances are that nothing will happen - but if something does (if you run that way long enough something will) the disaster will be horrendous.
N. Rieck
0
said
0
larry
0
said
0
As far as the reactor is concerned; it seems its been below par for a number of years. Usual situation when government (past and present) run anything.
Its also my understanding that the cooling system that is referred in the article is the 2nd back-up, not the primary back-up.
Steve from Gatineau
0
said
0
If the ramifications from both options (running the facility and shutting it down)are do dire...then Lunn should be fired, and Harper should be called to the committee for questioning. The government sets priorities and this wasn't on their Conservatives radar until Keen decided to shut it down.
Shelia Fraser for Prime Minister.
sarahk
0
said
0
Ditto!
Tom
0
said
0
She must have if the government was willing to risk the reaction.
And two good points made: 1 She's a bureaucrat not a nuke scientist and 2 the Libs voted to start the reactor up again too.
She needed firing.
J. d'Entremont
0
said
0
The isotopes do not cure anyone, they detect problems. How long would the reactor need to be shut down to fix the problem?
Vic
0
said
0
K. Blake
0
said
0
Bob Smith
0
said
0
She did her job. The reactor did NOT have a working back-up system.
Harper kicked-and-screamed like a little nanny since the private company running the reactor could not make more profit and that installing a back-up system would hurt their bottom line and bother the share-holders...
The conservatives are incompetent and should not be running this country.
Earl Robert
0
said
0
bluenoser123
0
said
0
I'm sure all people who needed those Isotopes will be supporting this decision.
Davis
0
said
0
Nick J Boragina
0
said
0
J Philippi
0
said
0
The president of CNSC was looking out for the nuclear safety of this country.
I hope Lunn is fired over this, and the government falls for blatant incompetence and political interference in the safety of every Canadian
Bob
0
said
0
Ted
0
said
0
Fact 1. The qualifications of Ms Keen are highly relevant. She is a career bureaucrat and not an expert on radioactivity. According to previous reports she has an undergraduate degree in biology and has no university specialist training in radioactivity or nuclear safety.
Fact 2. Why was she appointed to the position if she lacked background expertise?
Grim Reaper
0
said
0
John
0
said
0
Ray Jacques
0
said
0
A beeter solution might have been to extend the licence just long enought to cover the time it would have taken to instal back-up cooling pumps WITH MONITORING &VERIFICATION that it is being done. Firing someone so qulaified is absurd. HArpwer and his incompetent gang have to go. If they were honourable, realizing that the job is beyond their competence, they would all resign - starting with Harper !
James
0
said
0
Personally, I think she should have raised the alarms years ago, when underfunding started to create the problems that there is now with the facility. The heavy handed tactics involved in her firing will go against Harper in the next election - if Dion is brave enough to make the point - but the Liberals are also at fault here, because they clearly didn't provide the funding needed to keep the facility in top condition.
Karen in the Peg!
0
said
0
Is it fixed?
If not - when will it be?
Are we in danger if it's running and we don't have it fixed?
I don't care what party you're from or support - or who's fighting and firing...
Is it fixed?!?
Gladis
0
said
0
andré bérubé
0
said
0
Mike
0
said
0
A few facts would help here. For example:
Fact 2. She was not appointed to the position She had to apply for it.
FreakAlert
0
said
0
Justin McLeod
0
said
0
John T
0
said
0
The work remains to be done. When will be a good time? Later? That sounds safe, doesn't it. I think that is what they said at Chernobyl.
Leave science to scientists. Leave blaming and avoidance of responsibility to the Harper government.
George
0
said
0
Stephen M
0
said
0
Pat_Pending
0
said
0
S. A. Forrest
0
said
0
Her job has nothing to to with isotopes at all! If AECL wants to sell isotopes, that's their business, not hers.
To use another example: if a car is up for a safety inspection, do we really want the inspector thinking about how badly the driver needs it (e.g. is a taxi driver) while evaluating safety?
Keen's mandate had nothing to do with isotopes, so if isotopes had to be weighed against safety, this had to be done by someone higher up. And it was, by Parliament.
That's fine, but let's not pretend it was somehow Keen's job to have agreed earlier. Especially when there was a history of misrepresentation on the part of AECL here.
JF
0
said
0
In general, this blatent interference by the conservatives of an independent regulartory body used to protect society is symptomatic of the undemocratic leanings of the far right in this country. Harper's cronies are no different from their current masters, the Bush Administration in the US, which will do anything, including ignoring existing laws, to enhance their own executive powers at the expense of democracy. As promoters of unhindered and unregulated capitalism the ultra right wing needs to keep democratic forces, that would restrain and restrict it through regulation and social action, in check. That has always been the case and always will be.
Some Canadian
0
said
0
The fact that the PCO (through orders by Mr. Lunn and the PMO, I'm sure) fired Ms. Keen prior to her appearance before the Commons committee is just disgusting and shows a lack of accountability on the part of the gov't and AECL. Heads are rolling, unfortunately, they are the wrong ones. Mr. Lunn and the head of AECL should be fired immediately for their screw-ups. We're just damn lucky that the Chalk River reactor didn't go into meltdown after the reactivation.
Keep fighting the fight Ms. Keen!
Michael
0
said
0
BOB from Caledonia
0
said
0
Chalk River has been a jewel in Canada's nuclear crown for several decades why has it been alowed to be degraded to the point where it was not safe to be operating. Both Conservtaive and Liberal governments are to blame.
Ms. Keen I thank you for doing your job. I have relatives who live near that reactor and I want them safe.
JP Levesque
0
said
0
I think he shoudl been a man and honest and step down as minister-. He has DONE NOTHING for the people who elected him-
FIRE THEM - this is a HARPER THING !!! SILENCE THEM and they cannot tell the truth ?
SHMAE ON YOU LUNN
Vincent
0
said
0
What was Keen supposed to do? Ignore the fact that Chalk River is a mess and let the continue to operate? And what would happen if there was a nuclear accident that contaminated the area? I don't even think it was in her mandate. If you were Keen, would you ever SUGGEST running the plant against regulations to the government?
Maybe some of you who are saying the risks of keeping the reactor open outweigh the possibility of an accident. I suggest you look into Chernobyl first. Is the risk of generating medical isotopes worth it when it might contaminate the Ottawa valley including our capital? Especially when we could have got isotopes from the EU. If your answer is yes you need to give your head a shake. Would YOU want to live near Chalk River knowing that the plant is running essentially in override mode with no backup cooling?
Stop twisting the facts for partisan reasons for once and lets come together on this issue and do whats nessessary of the safety of Canadians. Ya, it sucks to have to bring in isotopes but we can bring them in from other places until this issue is fixed instead of opening Canada up to a nuclear disaster.
Is that not reasonable?
Jess D
0
said
0
Gramma
0
said
0
Al
0
said
0
1) AECL - they had known about this problem for a long time and chose the 11th hour to make a regular risk management decision and turn it into an 11th hour political and health crisis debacle.
2) CNSC - again they had known for months that this situation was bubbling and brewing and refused to actually take conscientious step and do something proactive about this situation. Instead, they also waited until there was public outcry and lives were being jeopardized before they did anything, and then chose to take a policital and partisan side on this.
3) The previous Liberal Government and the current Conservative Government - Both these administrations knew for years about the aging facilities at Chalk River and the work needed to get it into a state that doesn't threaten people's lives and chose to do nothing about it. Again all they did was take sides and blame the other instead of stepping-up, taking ownership and doing something that mitigates risk and prevents both a health and nuclear crisis.
All in all, this level of incompetence on the parts of AECL, CNSC, the Liberals and Conservatives is best suited to the type of behaviour you would expect from a special-needs group home!
I say fire them all and clean the slate. If this type of stupidity happened in the private sector, we would all be living in the dark ages!
Jeff
0
said
0
Darlene
0
said
0
What makes any of YOU qualified to decide that starting up that reactor when it was deemed to be operating unsafely by the nuclear experts is a justifiable risk? Are YOU all nuclear experts? I don't think so. And guess what? Those cancer patients who were at such great risk when isotopes were in short supply - they are still at risk, but now ALL of our family and friends are at tremendous risk, too, if the unthinkable does happen and a nuclear accident occurs. Will you think the risk was so acceptable then?
I agree with the previous poster - "IS IT FIXED YET???"
Sonny in Ontario
0
said
0
They already fired the head of the AECL, someone they appointed.
NOW it's time for Gary Lunn to get the axe.
V>Sinnott
0
said
0
Matt
0
said
0
She was right to apply pressure to get the changes made, initially.
However when the situation started putting lives at risk, she had to make a decision, and she made the wrong one.
The Minister told her to reconsider. She refused and complained about political interference.
Then Parliament (including the Liberals) overruled her decision, because she was wrong.
If an act of parliament isn't "political interference" what is?
If her judgement was so flawed that parliment was forced to overrule her decision, why would we keep her in that position?
Our elected representatives need to be the ultimate authority on issues affecting our country, not some appointed official. Appointed can't mean unaccountable.
-Brian, in Brantford, ON
0
said
0
DM
0
said
0
J-F (Ottawa)
0
said
0
She did exactly what she was supposed to do and what she was asked to do. And for this, she gets fired?!
Wake up people, she is the only one who made the "right" decisions since the very beginning.
PH
0
said
0
AECL shut the reactor down for repairs/upgrades. CNSC wouldn't issue the permit to allow it to restart.
There are 8 functional coolant pumps. There are 2 functional emergency backup generators. Only one backup generator was seismically protected. CNSC wanted the second backup generator seismically protected.
Even if all the pumps fail there are other ways to shut down the reactor (inserting control rods to absorb the neutrons and stop the fission). Chance of meltdown - incredibly slim and the presence or absence of a seismically protected backup generator won't change probabilities of a 'meltdown' (because of the emergency shutdown procedures).
Keen (or her people) failed to properly evaluate the risks of a problem vs risks of lost isotope production.
She should have resigned. She should be fired.
don
0
said
0
Bob from Caledonia
0
said
0
Lunn did not, has not and apparently cannot show leadership.
Shame on Mr. Harper for allowing Ms. Keen to fired for doing her job.
Shame on Mr. Lunn for not doing his and ensuring that the Chalk River recator was operating safe.
Shame on both Conservative and Liberal governments for allowing the Chalk River reactor to have fallen behind in safe nuclear operations.
Jesse C
0
said
0
Gail
0
said
0
Keith
0
said
0
Why and for what reason was this not noticed for 17 months.
Was anyone at the CNSC doing there job?
It ran for 17 months without any problems then on a whim it has to shut down completly!
Vic
0
said
0
David A. Cooke
0
said
0
Once again we see a far too partisan, extremely heavy-handed government dragging the good name of a top bureaucrat through the mud. This firing, public and shameful as it was should serve as a message to all public servants that no job is safe if they interfere with the reputations of their incompetent political overlords in this wretched and mean spirited conservative government.
Wendy
0
said
0
You are saying that producing radioisotopes to assist in diagnosing cancer is more important than the health and safety of the population and environment. Did Chernobyl not teach us anything? You are saying that we should be reactive instead of proactive. OOOPPS. Meltdown occurs and you think that that will be the time to fix the problem. There won't be anything left to fix. You are saying that we should worry more about not having radioisotypes for a month than the needless deaths of thousands and the desecration of our environment.
I know a lot of you who have commented have no idea what each of these organizations - AECL and CNSC do. Do your homework.
AECL is a crown corporation whose sole mandate is profits. Go onto their website at www.sps05.aecl.ca and read their mission, vision and values statements. Talk about conflict. AECL's 2nd Value statement reads...Obsessed by Quality, Excellence and Safety. Their 3rd value statement is....personally responsible and accountable. It is time they are forced to live up to these statements.
CNSC is a regulatory body who regulates Nuclear Safety in Canada. ...regulate the use of nuclear energy and materials to protect health, safety and security and the environment... They did what they are supposed to do and look what happened. It is not up to them to get the funds to fix facilities. It is up to them to ensure that the regulations set in place are being carried out. Visit their website at www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca.
You all seem to think that you must be an expert in the field in order to hold positions like Linda's. Common sense dictates that Nuclear Reactors are dangerous and common sense dictates that if your reactor or facility is substandard, then it must be brought up to snuff.
As for Linda Keen's qualifications, she has more qualifications to hold her position than Mr. Lunn does to hold his.........look at Mr. Lunn's. He is a lawyer. What does he know about Natural Resources. How does being a lawyer qualify him to head the country's natural resources.
Amy
0
said
0
S. Sutherland
0
said
0
The regulator's job is to force AECL to recognize international safety standards, taking into account human error and environmental risks.
The job of the Government is to fund the mandate that has been given to nuclear plants run and regulated under the jurisdiction of the Federal Crown.
AECL suffers what is called an "unfunded mandate" that comes to public attention only when safety needs conflict with production requirements. Linda Keen does AECL a service in bringing this to the attention of Canadians and Americans whose lives would be endangered by a nuclear accident. If goverments operate nuclear facilities, they have a duty to maintain them - to fund them properly.
Linda Keen has no purse where she can find the billions that should have been spent on mantaining the plant over the last many years. If not now, when can the plant be updated? Politicians do not serve citizens well when they start a bar-room fight instead of examining long-term weaknesses in safety provisions that only money and attention can correct. They seem to believe we in Ontario would prefer a nuclear accident or to push an accident onto future generations than pay one percent more in GST. Calling the various actors of the time "twits" would not change the sequels of the Chernobyl accident. And it serves no purpose here.
Kevin Dallaire
0
said
0
1)Chalk River's safety systems were not allowed to disintegrate, rather in 2005 they were required to be modernized to international standards.
2)CNSC renews the license on the conditions that Chalk River make 7 safety upgrades.
3)Chalk River informs CNSC that all 7 upgrades are complete.
4)During ROUTINE site audits during a scheduled regualar maintenance, CNSC discovers one of the 7 systems is not actually completed.
5)Chalk River's Chief Nuclear Officer is informed by CNSC that it is operating outside its license.
6)Chalk River's CNO keeps the reactor shutdown because to operate outside the license is an indictable offense. He has no choice but to follow the law.
Then we get into who knew what, and when, etc.
Leave politics out of it. Linda Keen may have been appointed during a Liberal government, however, she had to apply for the position through the PSC with all of the procedures (job competition, interviews, etc). She was deemed the best candidate at the time. One does not need to be an expert in every subject matter in order to effectively run an organization. Management skills are a different set of skills than technical ones. Managers need to rely on the technical advise of their staff who do have the expertise.
Nor do I believe that the AECL Chief Nuclear Office deliberately misled the CNSC about the status of its Emergency backups.
Somewhere along the line the breakdown is in the VERIFICATION PROCESS on the actions required under the license. Someone would have informed the CNO at Chalk River that all was good, probably a lower level employee.
Looks to me like all the big players are really not to blame. The real issue is a CORRECTIVE ACTION system that doesn't do adequate verification.
Finally, if one reads the Hansard transcripts from the emergency debate you will see that Chalk River is still safer than it was before the shutdown. Maybe not where it needs to be. Risk is low, but not zero. I think all members of all parties were in agreement and the debate was responsible and for the most part non-partisan.
Keen shouldn't have been fired over this particular issue. Perhaps other performance indicators maybe, but this one will probably stand up if it goes to court as it probably will. As someone said, she dots her "i's" and crosses her "t's". And I'm sure she has a great case. Should be interesting to watch that one.
Doug Rutherford
0
said
0
The reactor at Chalk River was running without a second backup pump required as one of the conditions of its license. This is the only item of any relevance in the manner and the CNSC did its job by not overriding the license requirements.
Nuclear safety is of far more importance than isotope production, and this is true even if there were deaths from the failure the produce them. A loss of coolant accident at Chalk River would be the equivalent of Chernobyl in soutern Ontario. Sadly, our elected representatives have no appreciation of junior high school physics and are more willing to risk the lives of hundreds of thousands to millions of Canadians to sell isotopes abroad.
Could we please collectively agree to elect people whose IQ is greater than their shoe size next time?
Jim Lad
0
said
0
This woman played politics with her position.
She took a passive aggressive course and showed absolutely no understanding or compassion towards those who rely on nuclear medicine as a last hope.
Once in a while, an individual with a serious character flaw manages to make it all the way to the top before the flaw is discovered.
Now that the cat is out of the bag, I think you will find, Ms. Keen has ruffled more than a few feathers on her way up.
Eric
0
said
0
If you want to conservative bash you should probably bark up another tree because there is nothing up this one.
bob
0
said
0
If a water treatment plant is not operating to standards the engineer in charge does not take into account to inconvenience caused to the population when they make a decision to post a boil water advisory.
I would like to hear what the plan is to get the facility to meet operating standards.
In my opinion the blame rests on governments past and present, and on AESL.
By ordering the plant shut down the CNSC washed their hands of any possible liability. By allowing the plant to operate the government has accepted it.
JJ
0
said
0
David from NS
0
said
0
Rob St. Onge
0
said
0
Tories, Liberals or even the Rhino Party - only a matter of time before a disaster strikes and then we can start some REAL endless finger pointing with no accountability.
Richard
0
said
0
Len of Calgary
0
said
0
Nobody
0
said
0
Fact: The flaw in the RBMK reactor that lead to the Chernobyl accident does not exist in any other reactor design in the world.
Now on to politics...
As far as blame goes, this has been an issue in the making over the last decade (at the least), and at the fault of both the Liberals and Conservatives. The writing was on the wall, and *both* governments chose to ignore it.
As a side note - Perhaps if the AECL hadn't been so underfunded, the Maple 1 and Maple 2 reactors could have been online by now, and this entire debacle could have been a non issue as the NRU reactor would have been decomissioned already.
Austin
0
said
0
Lies all of it. Propaganda by the CPC to justify their complete incompetence. And the Liberals under Ignatieff's watch didn't want to drop the perceived political hot-potato.
And everyone falls for it. Pathetic. Ever wonder why the USSR lasted as long as it did? Because the population did not question the propaganda issued through the media.
Sarah C.
0
said
0
Denis P
0
said
0
Typical bureaucratic foot dragging, leading to parliament having to pass emergency legislation to re-start the reactor.
That pretty much says it all.
Canadian Eh!
0
said
0
Since when did the worlds health issues become Canada's responsiblitly????
Personally Canadian Safety comes first..no matter how minor...a meltdown is serious enough that the shutdown should CONTINUE until the safety issues are resolved....
Gerald
0
said
0
Peter
0
said
0
Swine Warrior
0
said
0
Andre
0
said
0
Mike Potter
0
said
0
MHR
0
said
0
Hmm?
ance
0
said
0
when the reactor in question proved unsafe this body ordered it to remain shut down...
where in this did she fail?
GG
0
said
0
Evan R
0
said
0
This was bad business practice, the reactor shut down was due to back, to the back up systems. None of the hardware for the system was onsite, ready for connection, so construction was not even started yet for the backup system meaning that upgrades would have taken 6 months to complete. This equals 8 months of reactor shut down (taking into account for construction delays) for a system designed for earthquake zones which the ground has never moved in Ontario. So in my expert opinion restart reactor, build backup system have in place, test it, then shut the reactor down again for a 'Shorter' period of time connect the lines, then boot the system back up. How simple and less intrusive is this procedure for every one that relies on that reactor? Does any one see this?
Dan Rudka
0
said
0
Dan
Port Hope, Ontario
Ottawa Valley resident.
0
said
0
Glenn from kelowna
0
said
0
Wendy
0
said
0
I should have clarified my statement. Chernobyl comes to mind because that is the most recent one.
We are dealing with Nuclear Energy here and a situation that could become very dangerous if actions aren't taken.
M.E. Archer
0
said
0
Chris - Pickering
0
said
0
DW
0
said
0
It seems like the Liberal-appointee Keen was trying to damage the present government in what seems to be another case of a politically partisan Liberal putting the Liberal Party's interests ahead of the lives of not only Canadians but in this case people from around the world!
There are TWO backups emergency systems present ...the debate and stalling was about having a THIRD backup system balanced against the desperate needs od the sick and dying globally.
THAT is a no brainer...MAKE THE ISOTOPES.
tony
0
said
0
Carrie
0
said
0
1) an earthquake, centred under or appropriately near Chalk river
2) backup power fails to the cooling pumps
3) secondary backup pumps fail,
and most importantly 4) there would be a Loss Of Coolant Accident within the reactor.
Looking at these options most people would agree, the risk and probability of this happening is extrememly low.
Keen did not fully appreciate her role in evaluating the full risk in shutting down the reactor. She put the lives of thousands of people at risk in favour of paperwork, and doing things "by the book", which she is infamous for.
That being said, Lunn completely overstepped his bounds by firing Keen. He completely overstepped his bounds by even writing a letter to Keen. Both parties are at fault. These people should grow up and keep politics out of medicine and science.
Deb
0
said
0
Élie
0
said
0
Is there a scheme here to bring about the privatization of the nuclear industry by confusing the regulatory framework to the point they can justify a total reorganization along the ideological lines they favour, in a period when climate change factors will become increasingly important?
Surely they must understand the risks to their image, just before a possible election, of interfering with such vindictiveness in a situation where convention demands governments accept the rulings of independent tribunals, however inexpedient. The minister got a parliamentary over-rule. He did not need to follow up with a vendetta against Ms. Keen, and I find it hard to see the PMO allowing such a transparent example of government intimidation going ahead, without some calculation of eventual political advantage accruing to the Conservatives.
mario
0
said
0
Pat_Pending
0
said
0
Keen doesn't have the luxury to do as she pleases and must be held accountable.
Ken
0
said
0
I would wish people would understand to whole topic before commenting but I guess that impossible. The system in question on two of the eight cooling pumps was a back up to a back up emergency power supply in case of an earthquake. This system has not been in place for the life of the reactor till know, there can not be an Chernobyl accident with this style of reactor, that is just fear mongering and stupid comment by someone that doesn’t have any knowledge!
She (Mrs. Keen) had to go, she was willing to risk the lives of people who needed this Isotopes to survive. How would you feel if you or you new someone that needed this isotopes but could get them because of her decision? I agree someone at A.E.C.L. should also be held accountable for dragging this on. I’m sure they will. This problem did not start with the Harper government, look at the Auditor General report date 2002, oh yes that was a Liberal government. The Harper government has ordered a review of the company. Lets wait and see what comes of that people. I’m sure past Liberal Prime Minister’s would have acted the same, well maybe not Martin (Mr. Dithers).
Mark
0
said
0
Matt
0
said
0
It was't a backup cooling system, it was the second backup earthquake resistant cooling system.
Pretty unlikely.
Bob Robertson
0
said
0
DougD
0
said
0
What Ms. Keen did is commonly called suicide by cop.
Andrew
0
said
0
As far as I understand her agency is not allowed to look at what the reactor is producing, just if it is safe or not, which it wasn't.
Lunn should be fired and she should be re-instated.
Brett
0
said
0
http://news.gc.ca/web/view/en/index.jsp?articleid=372379&categoryid=1&category=News+Releases