Due Process and Democracy in the Nuclear Energy Debate

At a time when people are becoming more and more cynical and detached from the political process in Saskatchewan, the nuclear debate is an opportunity to restore faith in our democratic process.

Even before the Uranium Development Partnership Report was released earlier this month, politicians everywhere began drawing lines in the sand on where they stand on the issue of nuclear power generation in our province. We should always be suspicious of politicians and organizations who take strong, narrow positions before being presented with full information. The trouble is that these positions tend to be ideological rather than based on science and economics.

We should also be suspicious of government processes that lack adequate opportunity for public consultation to make a decision that will affect future generations. While a meager two weeks of public meetings is far from adequate, the current government does deserve kudos for at least making the Report available to the public, a position they did not take with the Education Property Tax Report earlier this year.

Government’s role in this debate should be as a neutral arbiter, not a cheerleader. A responsible government would explore a variety of different business plans on how to achieve the projected need of 1200 to 1750 MW of power by 2020. Instead of burying our head in the sand we should be open to all possibilities including nuclear power development.

However, we should also explore the opportunity for greater power demand management and the possibility of a greater role for renewable resources in Saskatchewan’s energy mix. Unfortunately, while they have invested $3 million of taxpayer dollars in the UDP, Brad Wall’s Conservatives indicate a bias by making no investment in exploring or expanding other alternatives.

Opinions on the idea of nuclear power generation tend to be exclusive: you are for it or against it. The problem at this time is that we simply don’t have enough information. While Ontario- based Bruce Power is showing an interest in building a nuclear power plant, a specific proposal has yet to be established. We are dealing with a myriad of unknowns, leaving a debate based on fabricated assumptions, hearsay, and speculation.

A decision about whether or not to proceed with further participation in the nuclear fuel cycle requires careful examination and thought. Enterprise and Innovation Minister Lyle Stewart has indicated that it will be public opinion and acceptance that guides this debate and, ultimately, the decision. Let us hope that the Minister is not referring to public opinion polling that can be biased or inaccurate.

There is really only one definite way to ensure that public acceptance guides this decision and that everybody in Saskatchewan has a chance to be part of this historic decision: a referendum. A full public debate and vote on the issue will indicate a clear position from the most important stakeholders of all: the people of Saskatchewan.

In the end- even after all information is available- risk tolerance for public safety is a personal issue that nobody except the individual can decide. It is not up to somebody else to decide what level of risk an individual should be made to tolerate, nor should they get to say whether an individual’s preferences are valid or not. We all have the right to a personal choice in this decision.