Speech (House debate)

{
    "time": "2008-05-06 13:45:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Hon. John Godfrey",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"1073109\" data-originallang=\"en\">Mr. Speaker, three points were raised, and very valid ones, by my colleague.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1073110\" data-originallang=\"en\"> First, he raises the question of establishing true costs. However, in any discussion of true costs, we have to compare, for example, what the true costs are of coal-fired electrical generating plants. Do we take into account the true cost to health when the particulate goes up? Do we take into account the true long term cost of global warming? Therefore, I am in favour of true costs, but they have to be compared on a wide basis.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1073111\" data-originallang=\"en\">Second, on the issue of subsidy, I think that is right. This is an industry, certainly through AECL and its research side, that needs to be subsidized. It needs to be controlled by the Government of Canada because it is such a crucial technology and it is also one which, if mishandled, has very dangerous and negative consequences. Therefore, I do not shy away from the notion of subsidizing a technology which takes us to a new place and will enhance our export capacity.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1073112\" data-originallang=\"en\">Finally, on the subject of unlimited liability, I guess the issue is if we were to change it from $650 million to unlimited liability, would we in fact destroy the possibility of there being a nuclear power future for Canada and the world?</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"1073109\" data-originallang=\"en\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, mon coll\u00e8gue a soulev\u00e9 trois points qui sont tous les trois valables.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1073110\" data-originallang=\"en\">Tout d'abord, il soul\u00e8ve la question de l'\u00e9tablissement des co\u00fbts v\u00e9ritables. Dans toute discussion sur ces co\u00fbts, il faut comparer, par exemple, avec les co\u00fbts v\u00e9ritables des centrales au charbon. Tenons-nous compte des co\u00fbts pour la sant\u00e9 de la pollution caus\u00e9e par le charbon? Tenons-nous compte des co\u00fbts \u00e0 long terme du r\u00e9chauffement climatique? Je suis donc en faveur de l'\u00e9tablissement des co\u00fbts r\u00e9els, mais il faut \u00e9tablir de bonnes comparaisons.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1073111\" data-originallang=\"en\">Deuxi\u00e8mement, sur la question des subventions, je crois que le d\u00e9put\u00e9 a raison. Il s'agit d'un secteur, en fait, EACL et sa division de la recherche, qui a besoin d'\u00eatre subventionn\u00e9. Le nucl\u00e9aire doit \u00eatre contr\u00f4l\u00e9 par le gouvernement du Canada parce qu'il s'agit d'une technologie cruciale qui peut avoir des cons\u00e9quences tr\u00e8s dangereuses et n\u00e9fastes si elle est mal utilis\u00e9e. Par cons\u00e9quent, je n'h\u00e9site pas \u00e0 pr\u00e9coniser que l'on subventionne une technologie qui nous ouvre des portes et qui peut accro\u00eetre notre capacit\u00e9 d'exporter.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"1073112\" data-originallang=\"en\">Enfin, sur la question de la responsabilit\u00e9 illimit\u00e9e, si nous remplacions la limite de 650 millions de dollars par une responsabilit\u00e9 illimit\u00e9e, r\u00e9duirions-nous \u00e0 n\u00e9ant la possibilit\u00e9 que le Canada et le monde puissent continuer de produire de l'\u00e9lectricit\u00e9 \u00e0 partir du nucl\u00e9aire?</p>"
    },
    "url": "/debates/2008/5/6/john-godfrey-2/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/118/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/3165/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "2454108",
    "h1": {
        "en": "Government Orders",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "h2": {
        "en": "Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "document_url": "/debates/2008/5/6/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2008%2F5%2F6%2F"
    }
}