Canada’s New Nuclear Gamble: An Imbalance of Perspectives on Small Modular Reactors in Canada’s House of Commons

Although nuclear reactors are considered a viable clean energy source, there are still many risks associated with nuclear power plants, specifically the high cost of construction, the risk of nuclear accidents and proliferation of nuclear materials, and the continued generation of nuclear waste. Small modular reactors (SMRs) have been proposed by nuclear proponents as the answer to these concerns. The Canadian government, convinced by the advantages of this technology, has forged ahead with an SMR Roadmap in 2018, detailing the necessary steps that will lead to the deployment of SMRs. While this may help Canada achieve its climate targets, no SMRs have been deployed as the technology is still mostly in the design phase. Hence, there is no real evidence that SMRs can address the risks associated with nuclear power plants. Using content and thematic analysis, this paper reviews and analyses the discourse recorded in the Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee proceedings and hansards of Canadian Parliamentary debates to determine how the perspectives of stakeholder groups and Members of Parliament have shaped the Canadian government’s decision to support the deployment of SMRs in Canada as envisioned in by the Roadmap. This paper provides insights into the balance of stakeholder perspectives and representation in the Canadian parliament and shows that an imbalance of perspectives that may have skewed the Canadian government's understanding of the advantages and disadvantages associated with SMRs. This, therefore, highlights the need to improve parliamentary engagement processes so that a balance of perspectives is communicated to the government, especially when it is regarding a potentially risky technology such as SMRs.