Critics of the current nuclear strategy warn that Canada is repeating the mistakes of other energy sectors by trading one form of dependency for another. By moving away from the natural uranium model that defined the CANDU era, the country is exposing its critical infrastructure to the volatility of global markets and the geopolitical whims of foreign nations. This vulnerability could prove disastrous if supply chains are disrupted by trade disputes, regional conflicts, or shifts in the domestic policies of enrichment-capable countries.
Skeptics argue that true energy sovereignty requires domestic control over the entire fuel cycle. Relying on foreign entities for high-assay low-enriched uranium undermines the strategic autonomy that Canada has enjoyed for decades. Instead of outsourcing this vital component, the government should invest in domestic enrichment technology to ensure that the country's energy security remains firmly in Canadian hands. This would not only protect the grid from external shocks but also foster a high-tech domestic industry and create skilled jobs.
Furthermore, there is concern that the lack of a clear plan for domestic fuel production leaves the nuclear industry in a precarious position. If Canada fails to develop its own capacity, it may find itself paying premium prices to foreign suppliers or facing fuel shortages that could stall the transition to clean energy. Accountability-focused observers suggest that the government must prioritize long-term resilience over short-term convenience to ensure that the next generation of nuclear reactors remains a reliable pillar of the national economy.