The Saskatchewan NDP says it supports the provincial government’s nuclear energy ambitions but is worried that language in the newly released energy strategy could signal a shift toward privatization of SaskPower or its subsidiaries.

Both the Saskatchewan Party government and the NDP opposition support developing nuclear power, building out the full nuclear fuel cycle from uranium mining to reactor operation, securing federal funding for infrastructure, and pursuing a mix of generation sources. However, they differ on the question of ownership of future assets.

"Page 7 of the (Sask Party's Saskatchewan First Energy Security Strategy and Supply Plan) states that the Government of Saskatchewan will 'conduct a governance review to determine the optimal provincial structure and mandate of nuclear power ownership, operation, and deployment within and beyond the provincial electrical grid,'" said Aleana Young, the NDP's Shadow Minister for Energy.

"For 18 years the Sask Party has politicized SaskPower. Anytime they start talking about ownership, I get nervous. We've seen this story before. 'Reviewing power ownership' — that's code for privatization."

The Plan, released Monday, commits the province to extending coal-fired generation until 2050 while building nuclear capacity and demanding Ottawa fund 75 per cent of the province's first nuclear reactor costs.

Young said the NDP supports federal investment in Saskatchewan's electricity infrastructure but opposes using public money to build assets that could then be sold to private industry.

"We fundamentally do not believe in paying for private assets with public dollars," Young said.

Shared support for nuclear, differing views on implementation

Both parties attended last week's inaugural CNA-West nuclear conference in Saskatoon and have publicly supported nuclear energy development for years, but Young said she's reluctant to call it 'finding common ground' — suggesting the government has adopted a position the NDP has held for some time.

"Can and should nuclear power be an important part of that discussion about what our power generation future looks like in Saskatchewan? Yes, and the Saskatchewan NDP has been clear about that for five years," Young said.

"Taking the politics out of power is incredibly important, especially when you think about the nuclear industry."

Young spent a week in Ontario this summer touring the nuclear fuel supply chain with Canadian Nuclear Association members, visiting Bruce Power plants and Cameco fuel processing facilities.

The NDP announced in August what they call a "rock to reactor" plan for Saskatchewan's nuclear sector, arguing the province should capture more value across the entire nuclear fuel cycle rather than simply exporting raw uranium — something Sask Party leadership have also emphasized as vital to developing the new industry.

"We shouldn't just be an exporter of raw goods," Young said. "When we look at the nuclear sector, what the future could hold for power generation, developing that economy, again, from rock to reactor, building good jobs, building opportunities, not just outsourcing them to Ontario and letting Ontario have the whole supply chain is essential for economic growth."

Criticism on coal and plan quality

Young criticized the government's decision to extend coal plant operations until 2050 after what she characterized as 18 years of inaction on the coal sector. She said the NDP are not opposed to keeping coal as part of the energy mix, but the Sask Party's plan doesn't make sense.

"These guys have had 15 years to save the coal industry, to save communities in the southeast if they wanted to, and they've done nothing," Young said. "At best, and again, I'll believe it when I see it, at best, they're talking about an expensive patch maintenance job on our coal fleet."

Young described the government's energy strategy as "thin soup" lacking specific costs, timelines, or implementation details.

"You can Ctrl-F for a dollar sign. There ain't many in there. It's not costed. It's unclear what their plan is," she said.

"Very much seemed like it was scribbled on the back of a napkin to make sure that they had something out."

The 16-page government strategy document does not include cost estimates for coal life extension, nuclear development, or transmission infrastructure expansion, other than a note that they will request federal investment.

NDP alternative also lacks costing

However, the NDP's alternative "Grid and Growth Plan," announced Monday at the CNA-West conference, also does not include specific cost estimates or detailed implementation timelines.

Young said the Opposition's plan will be released later this fall with independent economic modeling and will evaluate a mix of energy alternatives including renewables, nuclear, and natural gas generation.

"We have hired nation-leading economic modelers and experts to do a lot of this work for us, to build the case," Young said. "And we've done it without ideology. We said 'build us the best grid for Saskatchewan' and we committed to whatever the answer was."

Like the government, the NDP is calling for significant federal investment in Saskatchewan's electricity infrastructure. The key difference, Young emphasized, is what happens to those assets afterward.

"We absolutely agree that the federal government, if they're interested in building this country, if they're interested in reducing emissions and creating good jobs — putting dollars into Saskatchewan's electricity system, building those interties with other provinces, is the best bang for your buck that you can get in Canada," Young said.

"What we do not believe is that we should then turn around and sell those assets for 25 cents on the dollar to private industry to make bank. This is a government that is interested in cutting sweetheart deals with their friends and insiders."

Related Stories