In this case I appreciate the Rule of Law and I also look at the emergency situation our cancer patients were placed in by the NRU shutdown. It would seem immoral to me to impede the flow of canadian isotopes to the medical community and very ill patients. The Government action supported by Parliament restarted the flow of isotopes.

As to assigning blame clearly there are issues at the AECL as they were responsible for managing the NRU. I suspect it was a money issue that prevented the replacement of the NRU at the 2005 end of planned life date. So the Government of that day shares some responsibility. No doubt the Minister who is ulitimately responsible for his department shares some blame too as does his several previous Ministers.

The issue of the terms of the liscence may be considered by some to be a bit of a red herring. That is if the license was changed slightly it would not have been an issue. In fact the reactor had a main cooling pump and one back up pump. Had a siesmic event occured one might argue it could have taken out both back ups.

The arguments could go on for many pages but the bottom line still remains one of leadership. A leader must pick the best course for the conditions and Miss Keen choose a course that resulted in a medical emergency. Although well qualified Miss Keen is not an expert in nuclear technology. She has a Bsc in Chemistry and I believe a Masters in Food Science and had completed some work on a Phd in Strateigic Management. She spent several years in government where the main rule is CYA. I suggest that this is what she did here. To me the most unfortunate thing is that we have two main players Miss Keen and Mr. Lunn who are both talented, well educated, hard working and successful people and as Hamlet said “Oh that it has come to this”

The Law is a cornerstone of our society but as we often find other factors come to play to help us in life. Is it ethical behaviour to allow tens of thousands of very ill patients suffer and possibly die so that the terms of a license are upheld and the independence of a quasi judicial board is protected? I would like to see Miss Keen and Mr. Lunn shake hands and apologize to each other and the patients who were held hostage by this event. Instead this will likely drag through the courts for years. Sad really!

AECL voluntarily shut down its own reactor – without being ordered by anyone to do so – for that very reason.

For AECL legally to restart its reactor without both emergency coolant pumps in operation would have required it to apply for a variation of the terms of its license. One reason for the delay in restarting was that AECL was trying to formulate a plan to operate safely either without the safety pumps, or with only one pump functional.

Ultimately, AECL never did make application to vary the terms of its license.

For Ms. Keen and the CNSC to simply ignore the fact that the pumps were not functional would be to abandon its mandate as the nuclear energy regulator in Canada.

This is what it means when we refer to “the rule of law”. That Linda Keen, or Gary Lunn, or Stephen Harper would have liked the reactor to begin producing isotopes again is not the issue. The issue is how to do it in accordance with the law – because the law is designed to prevent a nuclear disaster.

The law required (a) CNSC to ensure that AECL did not operate its reactor other than in accordance with the terms of its license; and (b) AECL to shut down its reactor when it could not comply with the terms of its license.

Nor is it sufficient to say that the law didn’t contemplate a situation where isotopes would become scarce. That is precisely why this 50 year old reactor was permitted to operate at all. The conditions were that it had to have certain safety precautions in place, including the 2 emergency coolant pumps.

Remember that this reactor actually shut itself down (“reactor ‘trip’”) twice before it was legislated back into operation, and there had been 2 minor seismic events in the nearby area.

I suspect that the same people who today feel that Ms. Keen made an “error of judgment” would have a very different view had there been a seismic event significant enough to cause a meltdown that could not be brought under control because the emergency pumps were not in operation.

As for the political motivations, the facts are equally consistent with this government’s desperately wanting to avoid having its popularity eroded because of an isotope shortage, since a decline in popularity might inspire the opposition to trigger an election. Scapegoating Ms. Keen makes it at least look like they are doing something, which is convenient since the public generally doesn’t understand that it isn’t as simple as getting the CNSC president to make the correct stroke of her pen.

Nevertheless, I am more interested in exploring the ethical issues, and the issues related to the administration of justice. On that front, Mr. Lunn’s actions are, at best, legally questionable, and at worst, highly corrosive of public confidence in administrative tribunals.

And Gary Lund is a pretty good fellow too. Given the political situation and the desperation of Mr. Dion and crew its not surprising they are working this issue to try and drum up some votes. Hopefully in the longer run there will be improvements at that reactor and any others where there are safety issues as nuclear power seems to be the only rational answer to providing the electrical power we need.