For further study

While the Saskatchewan NDP caucus' handling of yesterday's nuclear development motion was definitely problematic, that's not to say the Sask Party is emerging unscathed on the issue. And indeed a couple of Lyle Stewart's comments from yesterday's question period hint at just how vulnerable they see themselves as being.

Remember that last year, Sask Party ministers happily joined Bruce Power in announcing both the start of its "feasibility study", and the government then declared its fealty to Bruce Power after the study was done. And of course all indications are that Bruce Power figures to be the main beneficiary of any actual nuclear development that takes place.

Which makes it rather stunning that Stewart is now trying to distance the Wall government from a study which it did so much to promote:

Mr. Calvert: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today have to do about the Bruce Power feasibility study. We‟ll come to the UDP [Uranium Development Partnership] in a few moments but right now we're talking about the Bruce Power feasibility study, of which many paragraphs and pages have been blacked out. But interestingly enough, Mr. Speaker, some sentences that have been released have some points of interest. It is indicated by this document that the Bruce Power feasibility study began by public announcement on June 17. But
interestingly enough, Mr. Speaker, this document indicates that the government was aware of the findings of that study by September 29 — September 29. Mr. Speaker, that's a period of about 15 weeks.

Does the minister believe a period of 15 weeks was an adequate time to do a full, comprehensive feasibility study about the future of a nuclear reactor or reactors in Saskatchewan?
...
Hon. Mr. Stewart:
...
Mr. Speaker, on that specific question, the answer is that that was Bruce Power's study. I don't know if that's enough time or not. It has nothing to do with this government.
...
Mr. Calvert: — So, Mr. Speaker, we are predicting then and planning the future of the electrical supply of Saskatchewan —
never mind what it might cost the electrical consumer in this province — on a feasibility study to which the minister now volunteers in the House that he's not sure if it's any good or not, Mr. Speaker. It's a very peculiar situation.
...
Hon. Mr. Stewart: — Mr. Speaker, as I have stated repeatedly in this House and in public forums and privately, this government was not responsible for the Bruce Power . . . whatever it was. Whatever it was.

Now, the contradictions in the Sask Party's position are certainly worth pointing out in and of themselves. But it seems even more noteworthy to me what Stewart's refusal to defend Bruce Power's report says about the province's relationship with the company which is driving the entire process.

After all, there's no indication that Bruce Power sees any problem with its feasibility study. Yet the Sask Party government is effectively conceding that it's so woefully inadequate - both in the limited amount of time involved and apparently its contents - that even one of ministers who proudly announced its creation has been reduced to describing it as "whatever it was".

On its face, that position seems to be based on an attempt to avoid answering for the contents of the study. But it raises an even more important question: if the Sask Party doesn't disagree with the conclusion that Bruce Power was hurried and sloppy in putting together a mere feasibility study, why in the world would the Wall government trust Bruce Power to run a nuclear reactor?