Clarification required in Public Participation Plan

I am deeply concerned about Ontario Power Generation’s proposed Wesleyville Project nuclear power plant, but at this time, I will focus only on describing my concerns about the Draft Public Participation Plan.

1. The Draft Public Participation Plan states that public participation “is meaningful” (page 6), but it does not define what meaningful participation might be. Does “meaningful” participation mean only that community members are free to say what they want and that they are provided with opportunities for doing so? Or does it mean that the concerns of community members will be considered by the IAAC and the Government of Canada and used to decide whether the Wesleyville Project goes ahead? The Draft Public Participation Plan must define what meaningful participation is in order to be a “meaningful” document.
2. Relatedly, the Draft Public Participation Plan how does not identify precisely how the participation of the public will be used other than to revise documents and to “inform decision-making” (page 7). By “inform[ing] decision-making,” does the IAAC mean that the public’s views will help decide on issues relating to the project after it has gone ahead? Or does it give the public a say in whether or not the proposal is accepted?  
3. The Draft Public Participation Plan says that the public must have “the information they need to participate” (page 6). This phrasing is also vague. Does this mean simply that the public needs to know when comment periods begin and end? Or does it mean that the Government of Canada is committed to providing certain types of information to the public? For example, does it require that the IAAC provide a transparent and complete impact assessment of the proposed project? Does it require an equally transparent and complete summary of alternative plans to meet the desired project energy goal, so that decision-making can be truly well informed?

As the Draft Public Participation Plan is revised, I call on the IAAC to do the following:

1. Clarify that meaningful public participation means that the participation of the public will be used to decide whether the proposed project is implemented or not.
2. Clarify precisely how public participation, including concerns raised by the local residents, Indigenous community, and experts on nuclear and alternative (solar, wind, etc.) energies will be used to decide whether the proposed Wesleyville Project goes ahead.
3. State that the “information needed to [for the public to] participate” includes a transparent impact assessment and an equally transparent and complete summary of alternative options for generating energy in Ontario, so that decision-making can truly be well informed.