In the runup to the federal election on Sept. 20, The Equity will be putting questions to the candidates vying for a seat in Pontiac. Readers can send in their questions to editor@theequity.ca to be printed in upcoming editions. Questions should apply to all candidates and be suitable in scope to be responded to in 200-300 words.

What, if anything, should a federal MP for the Pontiac do about plans for a proposed radioactive waste disposal facility at Chalk River and entombment of the reactor at Rolphton? If elected, what will you do?

Gabrielle Desjardins, Bloc Québécois

The Bloc Québécois candidate, Gabrielle Desjardins, submitted her answer to this week’s question in French. The Equity has put together a rough translation of her statement. Her official response follows the English translation.

The solution to Canada’s energy problem is not nuclear power. The Bloc Québécois is opposed to nuclear development, including small modular reactors, and to any risk to Quebec of nuclear waste contamination from projects such as the Chalk River dump on the Ottawa River.

In any case, the federal government must have a nuclear waste management plan. The option as proposed at Chalk River is not acceptable and is not safe enough. A real waste management plan would ensure the approval of the communities in Quebec and Ontario concerned and would take into account the risks of soil and water contamination.

The Bloc Québécois is strongly opposed to nuclear waste management and is concerned about the negative impacts that nuclear waste will have on the quality of the water in the Ottawa and St. Lawrence Rivers.

La solution au problème énergétique canadien ne passe pas par le nucléaire. Le Bloc Québécois s’oppose au développement du nucléaire, incluant les petits réacteurs modulaires, et à tout risque pour le Québec de contamination aux déchets nucléaires qu’impliquent des projets comme le dépotoir de Chalk River, le long de la rivière des Outaouais.

Dans tous les cas, le fédéral doit se doter d’un plan de gestion des déchets nucléaires. L’option telle que proposée à Chalk River n’est pas acceptable et n’est pas suffisamment sécuritaire. Un réel plan de gestion des déchets s’assurerait d’obtenir l’approbation des communautés du Québec et de l’Ontario concernées et tiendrait compte des risques de contaminations du sol et des cours d’eau.

Le Bloc Québécois est fermement opposé à la gestion des déchets nucléaires et s’inquiète des impacts négatifs qu’auront ceux-ci sur la qualité de l’eau de la rivière des Outaouais et du fleuve Saint-Laurent.

James McNair, Canada’s Fourth Front Party

First off, let me say that I, James McNair, am running under the direct democracy system of governance. Under the direct democracy system, my only job is to relay the will of the voters in the Pontiac directly. We are building a direct democracy system that will allow the people of the Pontiac to have control of me, as your MP. Using a direct democracy online portal and a phone call centre, I will truly find out what the people of Pontiac want to do about both Chalk River waste and the entombment of the reactor at Rolphton.

My personal opinion doesn’t matter in a direct democracy system. I am running to become the MP to do exactly what the people of the Pontiac want me to do, on all issues.

For me personally, nuclear waste must not be near the river that flows to the capital of the country. It just seems insane. That’s why I’m running to become the MP, and why I was appointed as the co-leader of the Canada’s Forth Front Party, to bring the power back to the people and stop all the insanity going on in the Pontiac and in Canada. I strongly believe that once the voters are in the driver’s seat, all the Pontiac problems will be solved by us – the people. Until the direct democracy system is up and running, please tell us what you think, call the main party line at 1(416)613-1571. The party is setting us a toll free direct democracy number next week.

Michel Gauthier, Conservatives Party of Canada

The proposed nuclear waste disposal site at Chalk River does not meet the criteria of social acceptability. As a result, I can only oppose this project at this time.

The problem is the choice of location, which is on a hillside that drains directly into the Ottawa River. This choice rightly raises many questions, especially since it has not been demonstrated that this project could not be done elsewhere. In this case, costs cannot be the main argument. It is safety that comes first.

As far as the Rolphton reactor is concerned, the situation is also aberrant. Abandoning a nuclear reactor on the banks of the Ottawa River can only worry the population. Also to be taken into account is the fact that Canada does not really have a clear policy on radioactive waste management strategy. This is not very reassuring for the progress of these two issues. In the circumstances, I propose that decisions on these two projects be delayed until Canada has a clear radioactive waste management strategy and, at the same time, safer options for the Chalk River waste and Rolphton reactor are explored.

Shaughn MacArthur, Green Party of Canada

The federally-owned Chalk River Laboratories are releasing radioactive and other toxic substances into the Ottawa River, in particular from the Perch Lake basin where three reactor cores and other radioactive and toxic wastes have been dumped in the sand. Just as frightening, a consortium of SNC-Lavalin and two Texas-based for-profit corporations has been contracted to operate Chalk River and other federal nuclear sites, where over 2 million tonnes of radioactive waste is found. The consortium is proposing “quick and cheap” disposal options that would not keep radioactive waste isolated from the biosphere. It plans to create a giant mound of radioactive waste at Chalk River that would be exposed to rain and snow and release tritium, plutonium, lead, PCBs and other contaminants into the Ottawa River, and to entomb a defunct reactor next to the Ottawa River.

These projects do not conform to International Atomic Energy Agency requirements on the safety of radioactive waste management that Canada has agreed to uphold. Concerned citizens, First Nations and scientists have done amazing work to highlight and oppose the inadequacy of these plans. Nuclear waste is too serious a threat to leave in the hands of cost-cutting private sector actors who have shown their incompetence on so many projects before.

As your MP, I will use all levers of Parliament – including emergency debate, committee studies and legislation – to:

Push the Government of Canada to immediately abandon the projects to build a radioactive waste mound at Chalk River and to entomb the Rolphton reactor;

Identify a site for a new state-of-the-art facility that will protect the Ottawa River and the millions of people that depend on it for generations to come.

Looking longer term, I will champion and drive efforts to:

Enact strict regulations to keep radioactive waste out of the biosphere;

Reform the nuclear governance system to ensure that radioactive waste is managed according to best international practices and standards; and

Take profit out of radioactive waste management once and for all.

Denise Giroux, New Democratic Party

The threats posed by the radioactive waste disposal facility at Chalk River and the entombment of the reactor at Rolphton are central to my decision to run in this election. It is a file I understand deeply, was active on prior to the election and will remain vocal about once elected. Citizens along the Ottawa and St. Lawrence rivers need to know the risk to their drinking water–and to all recreational and economic activities along these waterways.

I have been fighting these dangerous proposals these past few years alongside dozens of community and Indigenous groups. I wrote the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), participated in recent consultations with Natural Resources Canada, and wrote local papers often, to counter the Liberal/Conservative pretence that the CNSC can be trusted. I am with the NDP because we are a party committed to strong sustainable communities and investment in clean, renewable energies.

As the MP for Pontiac, I would meet with Indigenous groups early, and municipalities on both sides of the Outaouais who have passed resolutions opposing the CNL’s plans and asking for proper assessments to be done. CNL is the corporation run by SNC Lavalin (with two U.S. companies) being paid $1B a year by the Liberals yet still allowed to cut every corner AND spend millions of that trying to bamboozle us. I will host community round tables and will be vocal in the media.

I will continue to work alongside Richard Canning, the NDP MP from Vancouver who acted as critic on this file, to bring my caucus colleagues and other party representatives up to speed. I will press for decisions on nuclear waste to be removed from the industry-friendly Commission and the industry itself, for profit, because these decisions properly belong to elected representatives accountable to the public. Any agency involved must be regulated to the highest standards on a non-profit basis. We will find a safer option.

Decisions on radio-active waste will have major impacts on future generations and our environment forever. With the continued leadership of community, environmental and Aboriginal groups, I will work tirelessly on this issue, until common sense and reason prevail.

Sophie Chatel, Liberals Party of Canada

The health and safety of Canadians and the protection of our environment remain the priority of the Liberal Party. The fact is that most of this waste was created decades ago, under a Conservative Party leadership, and is currently sitting in sites across Canada. It is imperative that if the Chalk River project goes ahead, it meets international standards for the storing of low-grade nuclear waste and is rigorously monitored to ensure that no radioactive materials leach into the Ottawa River.

Continual environmental assessments have allowed for several opportunities for the public, indigenous communities, and interested parties to provide input and to submit comments, up to and including a public hearing. To date, the public comment process has led to changes in the project design reflecting the importance of consultation and engagement in this project.

Should I be elected, I commit to monitoring the project extremely closely. While it is important to acknowledge these parties’ scientific expertise on the matter, we must also remain informed and critical to ensure the safety of our community. I will request regular updates from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission on the status of the project as well as consultations and public input. It is essential for the government to provide iron-clad oversight over private contractors to ensure that the project meets all relevant international standards. The health and safety of the people of Pontiac is my top priority through the course of this project.

David Bruce Gottfred, People’s Party of Canada

There is so much irony in the activist push to stop this waste dump. This “waste dump” is actually the containment facility for a decommissioned nuclear reactor. These same activists were involved in the push to get the Chalk River facility prematurely shut down.

This was one of the most important sites in the world for producing various radioactive isotopes used in medicine, isotopes which are now in short supply. Now, according to them, they want to “Abandon the projects to build a radioactive waste mound at Chalk River and to entomb the Rolphton reactor; identify a site for a new facility that can protect the Ottawa River by containing and isolating radioactive wastes from the biosphere”

Which sounds reasonable. Until you consider that they are demanding the government move a nuclear reactor! How? We don’t know! Where? Somewhere else!

Canada now has governments so spineless that they allow our policies to be decided by people that think these demands are realistic. We were once world leaders in the development of nuclear technologies — remember the CANDU reactor? — but successive governments have withdrawn funding and left this important technological field to be led by other countries.

The current plans to contain the site are probably the only reasonable solution to the problem. Agreeing to move it will just create more activists that want to prevent it from being moved.

Register or subscribe to read this content

Thanks for stopping by! This article is available to readers who have created a free account or who subscribe to The Equity.

When you register for free with your email, you get access to a limited number of stories at no cost. Subscribers enjoy unlimited access to everything we publish—and directly support quality local journalism here in the Pontiac.

Register or Subscribe Today!