Alberta Hansard — 19 March 1985, Afternoon sitting (14:30) (Legislature 20, Session 3)

19850319

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 57 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Tuesday, March 19, 1985 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR. LEE: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure to introduce to you and to other members of this Assembly a special guest. It's been said that big things come in small packages, and this person is an example that great things come in tiny packages. For three years she was an alderman of the city of Calgary, where I had the pleasure of serving with her.

For over four years she has been a school trustee on the public board in Calgary. She has stood up for educational rights and, in many respects, has done so because of her interest in children through her own two children. She's here to see the Minister of Labour with respect to individual rights, and I'm not sure whether she's here to talk about discrimination for age or discrimination based on height. Regardless, I ask all members of this House to [welcome] a giant of a school trustee, Ann Blough. head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 206 Alberta Development Fund Act MR. MARTIN: Mr.

Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill 206, the Alberta Development Fund Act. The purpose of this Bill is to restructure the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund, creating two major divisions of the fund, one of which would make available long-term, low-interest loans to Alberta farmers, small-business men, and homeowners, while the other would engage in equity investments in business, which tend to strengthen and diver sify the economy of Alberta. [Leave granted; Bill 206 read a first time] Bill 214

An Act to Amend the Guarantees Acknowledgment Act MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill 214,

An Act to Amend the Guarantees Acknowledgment Act. This Bill would change to the present Act by changing some terms from "notary public" to "lawyer", and a phrase to make prospective people signing personal guar antees fully understand what they're signing, rather than just aware of it. [Leave granted; Bill 214 read a first time] Bill 211 Alberta Economic Council Act MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill 211, the Alberta Economic Council Act. This would establish a 30-person Alberta economic council composed of representatives of the various sectors of the Alberta economy.

The purpose would be to charge the council to advise and recommend to the minister strategies and policies by which Alberta could achieve the highest possible levels of employment and efficient production, to bring about a high and consistent rate of economic growth, by which all Albertans might share in rising living standards. [Leave granted; Bill 211 read a first time] Bill 5 Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Amendment Act, 1985 MR. GOGO: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill 5, the Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Amendment Act, 1985.

It's most appropriate to introduce this Bill this year, when Alberta will host for the first time the world conference on alcohol and drugs, sponsored by AADAC on its 100th anniversary. The principle involved in this Bill is primarily to allow AADAC to continue to expand its range of programs in the province of Alberta, in the interests of education in the prevention and treatment of alcohol and drugs. [Leave granted; Bill 5 read a first time] MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I move that Bill 5 be placed on the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] Bill 207

An Act to Amend the Debtors' Assistance Act MR. GURNETT: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill 207,

An Act to Amend the Debtors' Assistance Act. Mr. Speaker, the problem of the agriculture debt crisis is not going to go away by being ignored. The purpose of this Act would be to establish a program of debt adjustment for farmers, small-business people, and homeowners in Alberta, and it would create a debt adjustment board to administer its provisions. [Leave granted; Bill 207 read a first time] head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table the 1984 progress report of Farming for the Future and the 1984 annual report of the Farmers' Advocate. DR. WEBBER: Mr.

Speaker, today I'd like to table the annual report of the Social Care Facilities Review Committee for the calendar year ended December 31, 1984. In doing so, I would like to thank the hon. Member for Calgary Egmont for his chairmanship and the hon. Member for

58 ALBERTA HANSARD March 19, 1985 Cypress for his continuing hard work on this important committee. MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table the annual report of the Department of Hospitals and Medical Care for the fiscal year 1982-83. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to file with the Assembly three copies dealing with school financing in Alberta. This is with regard to a query by the Minister of Education about where I got my figures. It's a report of the Minister's Task Force on School Finance. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS DR. WEBBER: Mr.

Speaker, today I'd like to introduce to you, and through you to members of the Assembly, 12 students from the bilingual Madeleine D'Houet school in my constituency of Calgary Bow. Included in the group is a young neighbour of mine, Steven Morin. They are accom panied by teacher Mrs. Kathy Heinrich and by parents Mrs. Campbell and Mrs. DeSchryver. They are seated in the members' gallery, and I ask them to rise and receive the welcome of the Assembly. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to introduce to you and to hon. members of the Assembly 29 students in grades 4, 5, and 6 at the Allendale school in Edmonton Parkallen. They're accompanied today by Mrs. Whitney and Mrs. Kaptein, and I ask them to rise in the members' gallery and receive the welcome of the Assembly. MRS. LeMESSURIER: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to intro duce to you, and through you to members of this Assembly, 20 students from English as a Second Language at the Alberta Vocational Centre situated in Edmonton Centre. Accompanied by their leader, Ms Fernalld, they are seated in the members' gallery.

I ask that they rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. MR. GURNETT: Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure to introduce to you, and through you to members of the Assembly, Barrett Pashak and his new son, Justin. Justin is my colleague's brand-new grandson. They're seated in the public gallery. I ask Barrett to rise, and Justin with him, and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. MR. R. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure to introduce to you, and through you to members of this Assembly, 19 grade 6 students from Satinwood school, located in the Lacombe constituency.

Satinwood school is in the Joffre area, which is the action centre of the petrochemical industry in Alberta. I thought my colleagues would like to know that. These students have come here from that area to see the action centre of government, and hopefully we can show as much life as the petrochemical industry does there. They're accompanied today by their teacher, Mrs. Wendy Flewelling, and by parents Barb Walters, Elsie Duffy, and Bettie Ditzler. They're seated in the public gallery, and I ask them all to stand now and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. MR. DROBOT: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to introduce to you, and through you to members of this Assembly, 34 senior citizens from the little hamlet of Ashmont, which is known as the heart of the Lakeland. Accompanied by their group leader, Alex Hancharuk, they are seated in the public gallery. They are a unique group: they have a total of 2,335 years of worldly wisdom. I ask them to stand and receive the warm welcome of this House. MR. BATIUK: Mr.

Speaker, it may be appropriate today to introduce two concerned parents who played a very active role during the teachers' strike in the Elk Island Regional School Authority Association by trying to keep in contact with the parents and doing whatever they could to help end this strike. Very seldom does anybody get credit when they do anything good. These two ladies, Mrs. Simpson and Mrs. Lammerts, have come from Tofield today to bring the hon. Minister of Labour a big thank-you card, two feet by 18 inches.

The ladies are in the members' gallery, and I ask them to rise and be recognized. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Dial Mortgage Investigation MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my first question to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. What considerations led to the announcement today by the Securities Commission that they would not appeal the recent court decision dealing with Dial Mortgage? MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I guess it's important for me to emphasize something that I thought had been emphasized in this House before; that is, the commission is a completely autonomous body.

I'm sure the hon. member would not want to suggest for a minute that there ought to be political intervention or questions in terms of a political vein with respect to the commission. If the hon. member will read the legislation, I think he will very clearly see that the commission is responsible for the administration of the Securities Act. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. I always thought regulations were the responsibility of the government, but apparently not. Because of the publicity on this — I believe

section 33 of the Securities Act empowers the minister to order a special investigation of any aspect of the admin istration of the Act. Has the minister ordered an investigation under this section, regarding the competence or incompetence of the Securities Commission in dealing with this matter? MRS. OSTERMAN: First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would not respond to a question that deals with a specific case, particularly since the specific case the hon. member may be alluding to is still a subject of a hearing by the com mission.

But if the hon. member has suggestions with respect to policy, regulation, or legislation, I'd be delighted to receive and take into consideration those suggestions. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I'm offering

section 33 of the Securities Act. Has the minister considered ordering a special investigation to look into the Securities Commission? MRS. OSTERMAN: Again, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is addressing a question with respect to a particular case, and I would not answer it.

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 59 MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker,

section 33 can deal with any case. My specific question: has the minister considered using

section 33 to look into the relative competence of the Securities Commission in all cases? MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member has suggestions which deal with policy, legislation, or regulation, I have already stated that I'd be pleased to receive them. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question to the minister, Mr. Speaker. Last April 18, I believe, my late colleague from Spirit River-Fairview warned the minister in this Assembly of possible limitations, difficulties, with respect to the Dial case.

Following that, did the minister pass the warning on to the Securities Commission or take any other sort of action herself to make sure these charges would not be thrown out on this technicality? MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the hon. member one more time; the commission is responsible for the administration of the Act, In reference to the question, I believe the answer was given on April 18. I believe the question was asked just prior to that. I consulted with the commission in order to bring that answer to the Legislative Assembly.

If the hon. member will read that answer, he will note that I said that, as with all advice, it is subject to court

interpretation. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, Harry Truman would have a new saying about the buck and where it stops. My question was to the minister; perhaps we can get some answers if we deal with the Attorney General. Did the Attorney General recently hold any meetings with the chairman of the Secu rities Commission to review whether or not an appeal of the Dial decision would be in order? MR. CRAWFORD: No. MR. MARTIN: It doesn't surprise me, Mr. Speaker. Let me move on and look at another matter dealing with this.

The Attorney General rejected this before, but my question is: because the security charges against Dial Mortgage were thrown out on a technicality, has the Attorney General reassessed the RCMP recommendations that criminal charges be laid in the Dial [case]? There are no limitations there. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. leader should know information that I gave the Assembly last year.

It was my view that it would be an abuse of the process of the criminal justice system to proceed with criminal charges in any case, and in this case against unnamed persons as far as I'm concerned, because I have never indicated — and would not — who might have been under investigation in respect to the Dial matter.

But if for some reason other than the due process of criminal justice — for reasons of public interest or publicity or political involvement by the hon. leader in the process, or for whatever reason — he is suggesting that in those circumstances criminal charges should be laid when four senior Crown counsel unanimously said there was no basis, then that is a most extraordinary suggestion. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, we don't want to upset the Attorney General. I've never seen him get quite so emotional about something. At the time, the Attorney General said the Securities Commission would be dealing with it.

I recall that in this Assembly. That has changed. They obviously can't, because of a technicality. If the Attorney General refuses to reassess the criminal charges, my question now is simply this: is the Attorney General considering any other legal action at all on this matter, or is it the view of this government that because a government agency failed to lay charges within the limitation period required by the Act, that settles the matter once and for all? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, the question the hon. leader presented to me was properly enough within the scope of my responsibilities and within the scope of my duty to report and be accountable to the Assembly, as long as it dealt with the administration of justice in the sense of the Criminal Code, and I have answered that over and over again.

I said last year and this year that in respect to that matter, although it has often been perceived that the decision in respect to the Dial matter may have been mine, it was indeed the decision of the law officers of the Crown in the traditional way, in the way it is in fact handled throughout the Commonwealth, and specifically throughout Canada, in such cases. An assessment is made by law officers of the Crown, and a decision is made by them in due course.

My duty is to respond to the Assembly in an accountable way on appropriate occasions and to the public as to what was decided and, to the extent that it can be properly said, the reasons for it. I have done so. But when the hon. leader then moves into an area outside the admin istration of justice relative to the Criminal Code, I think he is aiming his arrow in the wrong direction. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. I would say quite frankly to the Attorney General that we have a rather new version of ministerial accountability here.

As far as the Attorney General is concerned — as far as the minister's assessment of that in this government — is the fact that the Securities Commission did not lay the charge within the time period the end of the matter? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I perceive that to be the same question in a slightly different way. In the light of recent events, which are publicly known as of the announce ment made by the Securities Commission today, the hon. leader asked me if I've reassessed a decision that was made one and a half years ago in respect to certain criminal law matters.

The answer is that that is not to be reassessed. Social Assistance MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to move on to the second set of questions and see if we can find some other versions of ministerial accountability. I'd like to turn to my friend the Minister of Social Services and Community Health and follow up on questions raised yesterday by the Member for Edmonton Kingsway dealing with the report Hunger in Our City. I hope members take the time to read this, because I think it's a very good document. I'd like to file three copies, if I may, for members of the Legislature.

Could the minister advise what investigation the government has done of the finding that 18 percent of those using the Edmonton Food Bank have no income at all? Specifically, could the minister indicate if these are single employables, who are not eligible for social assistance after three months? DR. WEBBER: Mr. Speaker, the report the hon. member referred to was prepared by the Edmonton Gleaners Asso

60 ALBERTA HANSARD March 19, 1985 ciation, better known as the Edmonton Food Bank. If the hon. member has questions about specific data in there, I suggest he refer the questions to them. In reading and analyzing the report, however, it is my intention to have follow-up discussions with the Edmonton Gleaners Asso ciation, particularly as they relate to the recommendations in the report. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. I recognize that it's somebody else's report, that might be embarrassing to the minister.

I asked if there has been any investigation by the government to follow up on the claim in there that 18 percent of the people have no income at all. DR. WEBBER: As I just indicated to the hon. member, Mr. Speaker, it is my intention to meet with the association to discuss these recommendations with them. We have followed up on a number of the recommendations. For example, one of the concerns of the Edmonton Food Bank organization was that people who were going to the Food Bank outlets were not aware of social allowance benefits or, in some cases, whether they were eligible.

We discussed the possibility of a better referral system being put in place, and we're preparing a brochure that can be handed out to people when they come to the outlets. The brochure would outline to them social allowance benefits and eligibility requirements and where the offices would be. That's just one example of some follow-up. We have staff in the Edmonton region who will be working with the Edmonton Food Bank people to follow up on some of the other recommendations that were made, to discuss them and see how feasible it is to follow up on some of those recommendations. MR.

MARTIN: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. It's very nice that we're putting out brochures, but they're rather hard to digest if we're talking about the Food Bank. I'd like to read just one line from the report. It says: The Food Bank cannot, however, be considered the appropriate resource for long-term or basic feeding of poor people; these responsibilities rest with the pro vincial government. My question to the minister is: is that a statement of government policy as well? DR. WEBBER: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member is well aware of our position with regard to that.

I've indicated a number of times in this House that when it comes to providing services to people who are in need, it is a joint responsibility of many sectors in our society, whether it be the individuals themselves, their families and friends, the community, local government, or other levels of government. I think it is important to point out another quotation in the report, on page 11, where it is stated that the Food Bank is operated on the premise that "within reason, anyone requesting a food hamper would be provided with one." That is not the philosophy we have as a government.

We believe in the establishment of a need before social allowance is provided to those people who are in need. The fact that it is easier to get a food hamper via the food outlet than to come to the Food Bank accounts in part for the demand that is out there. There are, of course, a number of reasons why a number of people are in a position to have to go to a food bank. Mr.

Speaker, I'd also like to point out that on December 20, upon assessing the current situation and discussions with the Food Bank people and using other factors, we decided it was important to increase the benefits for food, clothing, and household allowances for social allowance recipients by the amount of an additional $30 million, providing us with the highest benefits in the country.

At that time I predicted that would not have an impact on reducing the number of people who would be going to the food banks in the future, because I believed even our previous social allowance rates were sufficient to meet the basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter, except for larger families. In fact, in January the number of people who went to the outlets was higher than in December, even though the cheques were out by the middle of the month and in the hands of the social allowance recipients. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. I was trying to get to the basis of the statement.

I'm not sure, by what the minister said, whether he believes in that statement or not. To follow up, maybe I can refer to the Social Development Act — which I'm sure the minister is aware of; he's in charge of it — which directs the minister to ensure that no Albertan lacks "the goods and services essential to health and well-being," which pretty well follows up on the Food Bank statement. Can the minister outline what steps he is taking to relieve the Food Bank's burden regarding basic, long-term — not short-term — food provision, particularly for those with no income? DR. WEBBER: Obviously, Mr.

Speaker, the member wasn't listening very closely to my response, which indicated that in December we increased the food and clothing allowances and household benefits for social allowance recipients, par ticularly in the area of larger families or families with a number of children. We increased the benefits to where, in every category, they're the highest in the country. If the hon. member is attempting to indicate that our social allow ance rates are the reason people are going to the Food Bank outlets, I believe that's false.

In fact, if the member would read the report, there was no recommendation that related to increasing the social allowance rates. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. We just got through talking about the fact that they say 18 percent of the people have no income at all. That's what I was referring to. It has nothing to do with the rates.

My question now, something that does refer to the rates, has to do with the very first recommendation of the Gleaners report, that the government should undertake a new and objective study of the cost of living as a base for determining social assistance, rather than relying on updates of studies that are decades old. My specific question to the minister is: is the government acting on that particular recommend ation? DR. WEBBER: Mr. Speaker, we have already acted — in the month of December, as I indicated.

As a result of discussions with the Edmonton Gleaners Association, taking into account the cost-of-living index and such things as nutritious food baskets, it was decided that we would make significant increases in the food allowance for children and other benefits I've already mentioned. A minute ago the hon. member indicated a distinction between short- and long-term benefits. The increases that took place were for both short- and long-term benefits. He also keeps coming back to the point about the number of

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 61 people going to the outlets who do not have any income. Again, I would indicate that we have a social allowance system in this province, so that if people do not have any income and are eligible to receive social allowance — their assets are such that they're eligible, and a number of other factors — then we will provide benefits to those people. As I mentioned earlier, we think we can improve the referral system from the outlets to our offices, to have each and every one who wishes go to our offices have an assessment made to see whether or not they are eligible. MR.

MARTIN: A supplementary question to the minister. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary on this topic. MR. MARTIN: I would point out that the single employables are cut off after three months. [interjection] Well, that's part of the problem, and that leads to my next question. According to the Food Bank report, there's an inconsistency. They are very emphatic in stressing that there is . . . MR. SPEAKER: Perhaps the hon. member might come to the supplementary question. MR. MARTIN: I have to tell what it's about first. There is inconsistency of practice in the department . . . MR.

SPEAKER: Would the hon. member please come to the question. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I have to tell him that it says in there that there are inconsistencies. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Question. MR. MARTIN: Oh, the backbenchers get to talk; it's exciting for them. Way to go, Al. Has the minister issued any directive to the department in order to ensure consistent and compassionate adminis tration of policy? They say that there is inconsistency. DR. WEBBER: Mr. Speaker, I have trouble understanding the question from the hon. member. First he talked about single employables, and then he talked about inconsistencies.

Inconsistencies in what? MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, if I may explain it this time, then he will understand the question. They say in the report that there is inconsistency of practice in the department regarding emergency needs, recoveries, and single employ ables policy. My simple question is: has the minister issued any directive to the department in order to ensure that there is consistent and compassionate administration of policy? DR. WEBBER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we have discussed the concern with the Edmonton Gleaners Association.

I've also asked the regional director of the Edmonton region to meet with the district office managers to see that we have consistency in the way social allowance is provided to social allowance recipients. Having said that, however, I think the social allowance worker should have the flexibility to take into account the particular needs of the individual who is there. If we tie things down too tightly, it would take away some of that flexibility. MR. PAPROSKI: A supplementary, Mr.

Speaker, to the Minister of Social Services and Community Health regarding a clarification with respect to one of the questions by the hon. Leader of the Opposition. Does the Food Bank have a referral system to the Department of Social Services and Community Health for those citizens who are either first- time users of the Food Bank or indeed require emergency help? DR. WEBBER: Mr. Speaker, this is one of the things we discussed with the Edmonton Gleaners Association.

One of the points we've been making is that if people come to the Food Bank outlets and are eligible for social allowance, then they should be coming to our offices. That is why I indicated earlier that we're trying to improve that situation by providing the Food Bank outlets with a brochure they can provide to the individual who comes there. Again, it would indicate the benefits of social allowance and where they could go to have an assessment made. MR. PAPROSKI: A further supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

It deals with the allegation in the paper that those citizens who are on social assistance and for some reason do not receive a cheque — a cheque is either misplaced or sent to the wrong address — have some difficulty in obtaining assistance. Has the minister investigated that particular area? Does he have a policy that when indeed a citizen does not receive the remuneration he is entitled to, something can be dealt with so that he or she can receive that immediately? DR. WEBBER: If my memory serves me correctly, Mr.

Speaker, when cheques are lost or misplaced, the social allowance recipient can get a cheque within 24 hours. In addition to that, there is referral to emergency food services in the department. We have emergency offices in Edmonton and in other centres throughout the province, so that people who are in immediate need can go there to get assistance. MR. PAPROSKI: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. It deals with the ongoing communication with the Food Bank from the minister's office. Does the minister plan to meet with representatives of the Food Bank in the not-too-distant future? DR. WEBBER: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

MR. GURNETT: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary on this topic, and then we'll go on to the next question. MR. GURNETT: Mr. Speaker, reports published today indicate that upwards of 800 social allowance recipients were extra billed during the last year. My question to the minister is whether he has taken any action to reimburse those clients for those expenditures and whether the government has taken any action to prevent this happening in the future. DR. WEBBER: Mr. Speaker, I will ask the the hon.

Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care to supplement my response. First of all, I read the same

article the hon. member is referring to, and it is my understanding that every individual who was extra billed has been reimbursed. MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I was a bit startled by the news report of that item today. It deals with the report that

62 ALBERTA HANSARD March 19, 1985 covered the statistical review ended March 31, 1983. It took several months to develop that report, and it was then made available to the Alberta College of Physicians and Surgeons. I guess they studied it and included a comment on extra billing in some kind of report they get out to their members. I have gone through that background to indicate that those statistics are at least two years old and, in view of what has been happening in the field of extra billing, should be regarded as out of date.

The second point I want to make is that at the time those statistics were presented to us, I made it very clear to the college that that was unacceptable and would have to stop. It is my understanding that the college has been doing a number of things with respect to disciplining its members if those cases occur. The last thing we did is that about a year ago we met with the college to ask them if, in view of the Canada Health Act, they could get a further meaningful reduction in the incidence of extra billing during the coming year.

The statistics I have so far for the last few months indicate that they are making good progress on that. The bottom line, therefore, is that I doubt very much if any meaningful number of welfare recipients are still being knowingly extra billed. Oil Pricing MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the $7 million minister, the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Each day we do not reach agreement with regard to the PGRT, it costs Albertans $7 million. Since last Friday, when we raised the question, it is $28 million.

Could the minister indicate whether an agreement is being reached and how many more dollars it is going to cost us before finalization of the energy agreement with Ottawa? MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr. Speaker, first let me say that the hon. member's comments simply underline why this government has taken the strong position it has with respect to all aspects of the NEP and, since its inception in 1980, we have seen such a dramatic pushing back of the NEP from when it was originally unilaterally imposed by the then government.

In terms of the specific discussions themselves, I don't wish to be repetitive but I can simply make the comment I made last Friday: we are involved in those discussions, and I don't think it is particularly helpful to a successful conclusion of those discussions to make public comments about their status. That continues to be our position. We're working hard to achieve an agreement, and we are pleased to see that we have the support of the hon. members on the other side of the House in this regard. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question.

Now that negotiations have been delayed at least twice — in January and at this time — would the minister consider any type of resolution being discussed in this Legislature regarding the obvious position of the government in terms of PGRT, or tax in terms of profits, to assist the minister in further negotiations? MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the kind offer of the hon. member opposite. The position of the government is well known and has been clearly elaborated consistently since 1980.

I presume it's clear that we have the support of the hon. members on the side opposite in respect of these matters, and I think that gives us a very firm foundation upon which to continue and conclude these negotiations. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Could the minister indicate what actions are expected by March 31? Is it necessary that all aspects of the agreement be finalized by March 31, or can further negotiations with regard to parts of the agreement be concluded at a later date? MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr.

Speaker, notwithstanding my earlier comments, the hon. member continues to try to become involved in the actual negotiations, probing into how they should be conducted and concluded. While I recognize the interest the hon. members properly have in the subject, and that all Albertans have in this very important topic, I don't think it's helpful to the process to be commenting publicly about the time line of these discussions. It continues to be our hope and aspiration that a resolution of these discussions can be concluded within the time frame that has been set forward. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the Premier. In terms of the urgency and the cost of the matter to Albertans, and in light of the statement that has been made by the Premier that we are in a new era of federal/provincial relations, is it the intention of the Premier to become directly involved in the negotiations and bring them to a conclusion as quickly as possible? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, as I believe I mentioned on Friday, the carriage of the matter is in the hands of the minister of energy. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, in terms of the answer, is it the intention that the Prime Minister and the Premier have interim discussions with regard to this agreement, or will all be left to the possible crown prince in this Leg islature? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, this is a matter that will obviously be subject to an ongoing review from day to day. Mortgage Defaults MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Housing.

As we know, a number of citizens in the community have become victims of pro fessional real estate people who have tried to assist them in purchasing and upgrading their home styles. I am won dering if the minister could tell us why Alberta Housing and Mortgage Corporation is pursuing deficiency judgments against homeowners who have sold their homes, in particular those innocent victims who used the professional assistance of real estate agents? MR. SHABEN: Mr.

Speaker, the reason the corporation has chosen in some cases to pursue not just the vendors but also the purchasers as a result of transactions is really threefold: first of all, to reduce and, if possible, eliminate the activity of these scam or dollar dealers; secondly, in recognition of the fact that the vast majority of individuals and families who have mortgages are meeting their obli gations and making their mortgage payments; and the activ ities of these scam dealers have had an impact in driving down property values and thus eroding the equity, and the

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 63 people who are making their payments on time and regularly are being affected by it. Those are the principal reasons for the decision by the board of the corporation to pursue deficiency judgments. MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary.

While I appreciate the minister's response, I would still like to know why Alberta Housing and Mortgage Corporation is treating these honest people who dealt with a professional real estate agent or sales person or broker and who, prior to making the sale of the property that was mortgaged to Alberta Home Mortgage, were keeping and meeting their obligations and who found an opportunity — why are we treating these people like dollar dealers rather than taking on the people who probably should be taken on: the real estate agents or sales people in this scam operation, and in fact through to the dollar dealers they have brought on stream through their offices?

MR. SHABEN: Mr. Speaker, because of the circumstances that are occurring with these scam or dollar dealers, it's difficult to quickly identify the nature of the transaction. After a sale has occurred and a transfer has taken place and no payments are made, the corporation pursues it. Unfortunately, some of these operators are operating in a way whereby they're inducing vendors to sign transfers that are not completely filled out. Subsequent to the signing of that transfer, that property is moved on to a subsequent buyer, and the corporation is not aware of the middle transfer.

We have established a review committee, made up of four Alberta citizens and two senior officials from the corporation, to review those cases. Where an individual has entered into a sale and is unknowing in terms of the property ultimately ending up in the hands of a dollar dealer, we suspend the action. That process takes some time. I'd like to commend the Member for Calgary McCall for bringing to my attention circumstances in which that has occurred. MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary. While we're commending, at this time I would like to commend the minister for his assistance.

It's through his office that some of these have been slowed.

Considering that Alberta Housing and Mortgage Cor poration is pursuing some of these people, whom I have phrased and determined as being victims, I would like to ask if there is an opportunity for the review committee that has been set up to become independent and totally removed from the Alberta Housing and Mortgage Corporation, to give these people who have become victims — I'll use the term again — a fair hearing so that they can physically present their case to a hearing body and so that in the future there is opportunity for these people to be heard properly.

In fact, many of these cases I have might be backed up and could also be given that same opportunity. MR. SHABEN: As I indicated earlier, Mr. Speaker, the committee is made up of six individuals. Four are private citizens and two are senior corporation employees. I'll certainly give consideration to the recommendation of the hon. member. I think it is important for members of the Assembly to know that on a number of occasions the corporation has advised all owners of property who have mortgages with the corporation to contact the corporation prior to concluding or making a sale.

In many of the transfers the corporation has been given advice of the sale taking place and has released the individuals from their personal covenant. But a lot of families, after having been in communication with the corporation and having been asked, have neglected to do so. So I urge the members to pass on that message to individuals who are planning to sell their homes. MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, one further supplementary.

Has the minister undertaken to investigate some of the people who have been involved with these scams, other than the victims who used professional advice in their dealings with the real estate transactions, I guess with some of these overzealous real estate people? Can the minister ensure that some procedure is in place to take action on these real estate agents who dealt on behalf of the people they dealt with, who were, as I determine, their victims? MR. SHABEN: Mr.

Speaker, the corporation has been pursuing the matter in terms of the type of transaction that's occurring, and the Member for Calgary McCall has described it in part. I really can't comment on whether or not legal procedures or charges have been laid, but I will check and respond further to the hon. member. MR. SPEAKER: We're running short of time, and I wonder if we could come back to this topic on another day. MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, I just have one further supplementary, if I may. MR. SPEAKER: To be dealt with briefly. MR.

NELSON: Has he given any consideration to further amendments to the Law of Property Act or the Land Titles Act to stop this dollar dealer situation from occurring in the future? MR. SHABEN: As the hon. member knows, Mr. Speaker, in 1984 certain amendments were made to the Law of Property Act. Since the Attorney General is responsible for that particular piece of legislation, he may wish to comment. Canada-United States Trade MR. McPHERSON: Mr.

Speaker, in reviewing the com munique from the Quebec summit, I note that the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of the United States have issued a declaration regarding trade in goods and services. My question to the Premier is: could he indicate if the communiqué issued by the Prime Minister and the President bears any relationship to, or indeed concurrence in, the urgings of our Premier on the subject of free trade at the recent First Ministers' Conference in Regina? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I've only had an oppor tunity to quickly peruse the declaration, as has the hon. member.

It arrived in my office at noon. I have to say that it is positive in a number of ways, but it certainly doesn't go the full distance of the presentations that a number of the provinces made at the First Ministers' Con ference in Regina toward a comprehensive free trade arrange ment. Mr. Speaker, it does set forth two or three very important statements that are positive for the province of Alberta, if there is appropriate follow up. That involves

64 ALBERTA HANSARD March 19, 1985 reducing and eliminating existing barriers to trade in order to secure and facilitate trade and investment flows. Those are very positive terms. And to establish immediately a bilateral mechanism to chart all possible ways to reduce and eliminate the existing barriers and to report to us within six months. Mr. Speaker and members of the Assembly, it would seem that it would be very important for Alberta to be involved in whatever way we can in the process of establishing that bilateral mechanism, because we have so much to gain. Only one other comment to the member.

There is a specific provision that is very encouraging and that sets forth the concentrating initially by the two governments that affect Alberta directly. So they're listening somewhat. I'd like to read into the record that particular important item. There may be others that I haven't had the chance to consider, Mr. Speaker.

Such action will proceed on the basis of full consultation with the private sector and other levels of government and will concentrate initially on [the fourth item] strengthening our market approach to Canada-United States energy trade by reducing restrictions, particularly those on petroleum imports and exports, and by main taining and extending open access to each other's energy markets, including oil, natural gas, electricity, and coal. MR. McPHERSON: A supplemental, Mr. Speaker.

Does the Premier intend to hold further discussions with the Prime Minister on the subject of trade, particularly as it relates to Alberta's access to markets in the northwestern United States? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, it is my intention to raise this matter directly with the Prime Minister at a meeting of first ministers scheduled for Ottawa on the morning of April 4. I will ask the Prime Minister, and in due course report to the Legislature, to elaborate upon this important document at that time. MR. McPHERSON: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

Does the Premier anticipate engaging in discussions on this important matter of free trade with the governors of some of the trading nations of the United States directly to the south of us? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, there's some advantage in that, but perhaps more important from our point of view is engaging in discussions with members of the United States Senate from those states which are particularly involved in trade with Alberta. MR. SPEAKER: We're running short of time. Perhaps we can deal briefly with a question from the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview. MR.

GURNETT: I'd be happy to wait until tomorrow, Mr. Speaker. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Clover Bar wishes permission to revert to Introduction of Special Guests. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS (reversion) DR. BUCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I take great pleasure this afternoon in introducing someone very close — closer than close — the mayor of Elk Point, which is the centre of the petrochemical industry right now in heavy oil sands development.

The mayor of Elk Point, my kid brother, is seated in the public gallery, and I'd ask him to stand and receive the welcome of the House. MR. OMAN: Mr. Speaker, if I could have your permission, I would like to welcome to the Assembly through you a number of students, who I believe should be here now, from the Thickwood Heights school in Fort McMurray. I'm filling in for the hon. Member for Lac La Biche-McMurray, who had to be out of town this afternoon. They are accompanied by their teachers Dorothy Walch and Jeannie Tuomi, and parents Gary McNeil and Len Leippi.

I would like them to please stand and receive the welcome of the House, if they would. MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the questions and motions for returns, I simply move that Motion for Return 136 stand and retain its place on the Order Paper. [Motion carried] head: WRITTEN QUESTIONS 130. Mr.

Martin asked the government the following question: For each of the calendar years 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, and 1984: (1) in how many individual instances was a recommendation for prosecution forwarded by the RCMP to the Attorney General's department rejected, and (2) in each of the instances noted pursuant to clause (1), what was the charge for which the RCMP recommended prosecution? 131. Mr.

Martin asked the government the following question: Will the government undertake as a matter of policy when responding to motions for returns and to questions susceptible to being made orders for returns, when the government feels compelled to move that the motion or question, as the case may be, be amended to note "the general principles contained in Citation 390 of the fifth edition of Beauchesne's Parlia mentary Rules and Forms insofar as they may relate to a provincial legislature," declare either in the proposed amend ment or in the course of debate on the proposed amendment, precisely which paragraph and subparagraph, as appropriate, of the citation is being deemed applicable?

MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I would like to raise a question of procedure that relates to questions 130 and 131. I recognize that questions, as distinct from motions for returns, cannot be debated. At the same time, the point of order I would like to raise has in it some ingredients which, I submit to you, will be relevant to those two questions. In my view, Mr. Speaker, neither question would be appropriate for the minister to express the necessary opinion under Standing Order 36 that would result in a return being ordered by the Assembly.

They are distinctly questions and do not lend themselves to that procedure which is allowed

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 65 for under Standing Order 36. Nor can either question be answered in the particulars asked for. If it were possible to do so, then the minister responding in each case would comply with Standing Order 34(2), which would call upon him to give an answer in writing. Mr. Speaker, it may be that the rules could be looked at for some clarification. I don't have a specific proposal in this respect now but will conclude by noting that there may be a point later this afternoon when your ruling would be required.

If clarification is required in any area, it might be as to whether or not a written question could be treated in any respect similar to an oral question; in other words, to have the response also given orally. Mr. Speaker, whether or not a ruling occurs on that point, in very brief terms the submission I make this afternoon, I admit without authority from either Beauchesne or Erskine May, is that since the standing order does not specifically refer to the fact that an answer to a written question cannot be given orally, perhaps by implication the Standing Orders would allow for that.

I intend to undertake today, as each of those questions is called, if I have the leave of the Assembly, to place on record some response which, if Your Honour later required it, could then also be submitted in writing in order to comply with Standing Order 34(2). I conclude with two points: that with the leave of the Assembly I would make some oral response to those two questions, but that neither of them are, by their nature, such that could be made an order for a return in the circumstances. MR.

SPEAKER: The Assembly is, of course, the master of its own procedure, and if there is unanimous agreement with the proposal made by the hon. Government House Leader, that can be done. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, this is of course a new curve thrown. We could be establishing some policy here. I, for one, would not like to rush into it this afternoon but would take the remarks and give you, sir, some time also to think about what the Attorney General has said and perhaps come back in the next day or so with some arguments for it or not. If we make a decision here today, I think we're sort of bound by it.

I, for one, want some time to study it. MR. SPEAKER: With respect to the hon. Leader of the Opposition, I would not see a unanimous consent given to an exception as establishing a binding precedent requiring that the same thing be done or permitted again in the future. But if the Assembly agrees with the suggestion of the hon. Leader of the Opposition, that the matter stand over until, say, Thursday for it to be given further consideration, that might be a way of dealing with the matter for the moment. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder then, to be clear, if the Leader of the Opposition is simply suggesting that both matters stand until Thursday. If that is so, I have no objection. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, yes. I suggest that we just hold it until Thursday. MR. SPEAKER: Does the Assembly agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. SPEAKER: Anyone contrary? It is so ordered. I understand that we've now dealt with questions 130 and 131. 132. Mr.

Martin asked the government the following question: Will the government undertake as a matter of policy, when commissioning, preparing, and presenting reports by con sultants, to follow the procedure and guidelines outlined in Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms (fifth edition). Citation 390(4); and, specifically, will the government under take as a matter of policy in such instances to ensure that (1) all consultants' studies and reports are assigned a category similar to those outlined in Citation 390(4)(

a) and (

b) by the responsible minister, as outlined in Citation 390(4)(c), prior to the engaging of any given consultant's services, and (2) all consultants' studies and reports are comprised of at least two volumes, as outlined in Citation 390(4)(d)? MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I'm going to answer the question verbally, and the answer is no. MR. SPEAKER: I hesitate to interrupt the hon. deputy leader, but aren't we doing now what we were going to consider whether we might do on Thursday? I'm not aware of any provision for extending the Oral Question Period as far as answers are concerned.

It seems to me that the situation at the moment is whether or not the question is going to be answered at all, not whether it's going to be answered orally. However, again, if there's unanimous consent — although that might be departing from what we agreed to a moment ago, as I understand it — the House is the master of its own procedures. MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I can put it in writing, and I will undertake to do so on Thursday. 133. Mr.

Martin asked the government the following question: In each case, what is the government's best estimate of when it will be able to table responses to the following written questions and motions for returns:

(1) Order made November 3, 1983, on Motion 212 as amended, for certain documents relating to the use of Mount Allan for the 1988 Winter Olympics;

(2) Order made November 24, 1983, on Motion 218 as amended, for information concerning provincial employ ees located in offices outside Alberta and their travel;

(3) Order made April 5, 1984, on Motion 135 as amended, for production of Alberta Crown prosecutors agents' manual;

(4) Order made March 20, 1984, on Motion 139 as amended, concerning a trip to Europe by the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs;

(5) Order made March 20, 1984, on Motion 140 as amended, concerning travel by Members of the Legislative Assem bly, Executive Council, and senior staff;

(6) Order made April 17, 1984, on Motion 160, for production of information concerning the operations of the Luscar Sterco mine;

(7) Order made April 17, 1984, on Motion 161, for production of directives issued to Luscar Sterco

(1977) Ltd. and/or Luscar Ltd.;

(8) Order made May 1, 1984, on Motion 162 as amended, for production of certain contracts providing for pay ments to a direct associate of a Member of the Legislative Assembly or to a minister;

66 ALBERTA HANSARD March 19, 1985

(9) Order made May 29, 1984, on Motion 178 as amended, for information concerning employees of the government in offices outside Alberta and their travel;

(10) Order made May 31, 1984, on Motion 181, for infor mation concerning reports and studies regarding Kan- anaskis Provincial Park;

(11) Order made November 8, 1984, on Motion 182 as amended, for details of costs of a trip to Japan and South Korea by 15 government and school officials;

(12) Order made November 8, 1984, on Motion 183 as amended, for information about a loan made through special warrant;

(13) Order made November 6, 1984, on Motion 184, for information concerning special promotions undertaken under the "Canadian Umbrella"; and

(14) Written Question 185, accepted November 13, 1984, concerning disaster assistance payments made to various residents of the Valleyview area. head: MOTIONS FOR RETURNS 134. Mr.

Martin moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing, for the fiscal year beginning April 1, 1983, and ending March 31, 1984, a list of all expenditures approved by the Treasury Board with respect to hospitality and entertainment expenses, itemizing for each event, where known: (1) the meal, reception, or other entertainment provided, (2) the number of persons attending, (3) the names of those attending, (4) the offices of those attending, (5) the names of groups attending or represented by atten dees, (6) the number of bottles of spirits, wine, and beer served, (7) the brand names of all the spirits, wine, and beer served, and the cost per bottle, and (8) the total cost of the meal, reception, or other enter tainment provided.

MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, the basic elements of this motion for a return as requested are, and have been in past years, found in the Alberta Gazette and are also referred to in the directives of the Treasury Board. In its essence, the motion asks for the amount of public expenditure for each of the many functions which are held over the course of a year in the province of Alberta. It also requests the specific dates and locations of each of those functions.

As well, it implicitly asks for the purpose of each of those functions, whether they're for trade promotion, to assist marketing, meeting with farmers or businessmen, or inter- provincial relations. In the past we've had no problem in providing that kind of information. Since 1978 that information has been pro vided by the Alberta Gazette, as published from time to time. That has been our course of action, and that will be the situation in the future. So there is a duplication.

As members know, the Alberta Gazette regularly pub lishes, pursuant to Treasury Board directives, the hosting and hospitality of each of the various government depart ments. In that connection, Mr. Speaker, I think it would be appropriate if I filed for the Assembly copies of the Treasury Board directive which deals with and sets forth the detailed hospitality rules. There is a copy available for the Leader of the Opposition as well. The original directive was in 1978. It has been amended and updated from time to time.

I think it's instructive to briefly review those, because they relate directly to the notice of motion. The requirements and conditions with respect to hosting and hospitality of this government, as indicated in this original directive and its subsequent directives, are comprehensive. They're pretty rigorous. For example, hospitality expenses are eligible only in cases where (

a) the Government hosts private or government guests from outside Alberta and hospitality is necessary or desirable as a matter of courtesy or to facilitate the conduct of Government business, (

b) official Government business discussions take place with persons not employed by the Alberta Government, and, (

c) persons, including spouses, associated with inter national, national, governmental, or other organ izations are involved. They set forth that working luncheon or dinner meetings with the attend ance of Government of Alberta employees are eligible for reimbursement [only] where such meetings are necessary for the conduct of Government business. It notes that no claim for hospitality or working lunches may be made where . . . the event is purely social such as terminations, transfers, marriages, births and events of that kind.

It notes and requires that expenses for hospitality and working lunches must be reasonable . . . Deputy heads [of departments] or their designates must approve all requests for payment of hospitality and working lunch expenses. Then there's a four-part series of steps through which any expenditure over $400 must be approved: (

a) approved by the department head, (

b) reviewed by the Deputy Provincial Treasurer, (

c) recommended by the Provincial Treasurer to the Treasury Board, and (

d) approved by Treasury Board before any payment can be made. When there is a payment or an application for hospitality or working lunch expenses under $400, that can be made only on a detailed travel expense account form. As well, as I noted previously,

section 11 states very clearly that all hospitality expenses paid pursuant to

section 7 of this Directive shall be summarized and published annually in the Alberta Gazette. That has been done ever since 1978. Mr. Speaker, I believe the citizens of this province expect their government to avoid unnecessary duplication, minimize overlapping, and avoid the production of redundant information. I think they have that same requirement and expectation of their provincial Legislature. They want reg ulations and paperwork kept to a minimum. They want their government and their Legislature to be lean, trim, and economical.

The May 1985 Gazette, forthcoming in a number of weeks, will have the essentials of this question as information provided, as has been done in previous years. I am informed that the production of all the detailed information referred to in the total of the motion for a return would involve an expenditure probably exceeding $50,000. I suggest and submit that that kind of expenditure, for what is essentially duplication and redundant information made public, would not be a prudent public expenditure.

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 67 Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I submit that to pass this motion would represent a duplication and a waste of time and manpower. I urge members of the Assembly to defeat the motion. MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. leader conclude the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, a very good case was made by the Treasurer, if only he had told all the aspects of the Alberta Gazette. The Treasurer is well aware that not all the things we are asking for in Motion for a Return 134 are in the Alberta Gazette.

The point we have tried to make to this government is that actions speak louder than words. The reason for a process like this is that when this government talks about restraint, Albertans want to know that in fact this government is also following restraint. That's the purpose of an exercise like this. The Treasurer is well aware that you cannot get a lot of that information in the Alberta Gazette. To say that it's time-consuming and that the paperwork — where you get $50,000 out of that, I don't know; I expect that one was reached out of midair, Mr. Speaker.

The point is that by doing this particular exercise and by having us all follow self-discipline in this so-called time of restraint, Albertans will then go along with other sug gestions the government might make in dealing with the recession. But if we can't get this type of information and they feel that there are two rules — one for government, ministers, and top people in the civil service and another rule for them — then I suggest that cynicism develops.

The Treasurer's hiding behind paperwork and duplication and trying to justify it that way is not going to wash with the average unemployed person and the other people we're talking about. Mr. Speaker, I expect I'm going to be disappointed. I have not won a vote yet. But I think the government is hiding behind a technicality in not wanting to give this information, and I think they'll pay for it. [Motion lost] 135. Mr.

Martin moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing, for the fiscal year beginning April 1, 1984, and ending March 31, 1985, a list of all expenditures approved by the Treasury Board with respect to hospitality and entertainment expenses, itemizing for each event, where known: (1) the meal, reception, or other entertainment provided, (2) the number of persons attending, (3) the names of those attending, (4) the offices of those attending, (5) the names of groups attending or represented by atten dees, (6) the number of bottles of spirits, wine, and beer served, (7) the brand names of all the spirits, wine, and beer served, and the cost per bottle, and (8) the total cost of the meal, reception, or other enter tainment provided. [Motion lost] head: MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS 201.

Moved by Mr. Zip:

Be it resolved that the Assembly recommend that the government introduce a policy of issuing special licence plates for vehicles registered in the name of or regularly used by disabled drivers, that will permit such vehicles to be readily identifiable. MR. ZIP: My decision to introduce this motion was prompted by two widely separated events in my life, one recent and one that reaches back to the 1940s. The latter event involved a cousin of my father who came back from the war a wheelchair case.

He came in his car from Winnipeg to visit my parents, and across the trunk of his car were prominently displayed signs which read as follows: "Caution; Disabled Driver; Car Hand-controlled". I asked my father's cousin how necessary that sign was and whether he felt endangered by it. His reply was that it helped immensely, especially when he drove in Winnipeg. And any time he had trouble on the highway, people were prompted to stop and help him. At that time there was no concern over handicapped parking.

The concern was over the care and attention motorists gave to handicapped drivers on the streets and roads to make their driving experiences safer and more pleasant. A prominently displayed sign on cars at that time readily identified the handicapped driver, something that special licence plates would do today. The recent event involves my meeting with Mr. Rod Anderson, a constituent of mine who leads a very active life despite his serious disabilities. He is back in the work force and is very actively involved in the Crossroads com munity.

He pointed out to me the difficulties he experienced not only with having to cope with boorish and inconsiderate drivers on the street but also with quick identification of his vehicle and using the handicapped parking spaces that are assigned to them. He indicated to me that the present system of transferrable handicapped signs was not visible enough and that the best way this problem would be solved would be through special handicapped licence plates. Hon. members, I promised him that I would take this matter to the attention of this House for your careful consideration.

Throughout the United States this problem has so far been addressed through the issuance of special handicapped licence plates by 33 of the 50 states. In Canada two provinces are issuing special handicapped licence plates; namely, Ontario and Nova Scotia. The province of Saskatchewan has special tabs on the licence plates of handicapped drivers.

The upside of the special licence plate is ready identification, both on the street and in the parking lot, so other drivers can extend extra care and caution to such drivers and police can readily identify such vehicles, especially when a handicapped driver is visiting either out of province or in another town or city in the province. [Mr. Purdy in the Chair] The downside, of course, is the fear that some handi capped drivers have of being exposed to robbery and assault because they are readily identified as being handicapped.

There is the additional wish on the part of some of them to be as anonymous and invisible as possible. The special licence plate takes away from this. Of course, this is a concern that can be met partly by having a mobile phone or a CB radio in the car.

68 ALBERTA HANSARD March 19, 1985 The problem of security on the streets for the disabled does not go away with another form of identification. People who look to committing acts of violence against the disabled can readily identify them through observation. Every one of us needs to be cautious while on the road and not travel alone at late hours or in dangerous areas of the city. Keeping to well-lit and well-travelled thoroughfares and busy areas of the city, especially at night, makes sense for everyone, not just the handicapped.

Following these precautions alle viates most of the problems relating to assault and violence created by a readily identifiable handicapped licence plate. On the positive side, such a plate provides an incentive to extend courtesy and extra care towards a handicapped driver, whether he's driving or parking. Hon. members, I urge you to pass this motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. HYLAND: Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure to speak on Motion 201 this afternoon, not only as the Member of the Legislative Assembly for Cypress but as one of the members of the Canadian Paraplegic Association, Alberta Division Board.

I've sat on that board for a number of years, and I would like to speak on this motion from that aspect. The hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View outlined some of the problems that exist with having disabled mark ings on licence plates. That's the reason the Canadian Paraplegic Association is hesitant about supporting such a move.

The history of the association's work in this aspect goes back to 1981, when Rick Hiatt, the then executive director of the association, contacted officials in the Solicitor General's department to talk about what could be done to assist handicapped people with problems they faced in finding parking spots and parking. After a number of discussions about these problems and a great deal of time spent on this aspect at board meetings, the association took it upon itself to produce a placard, which I'll pass to all members, and also an application form, which members can forward to their constituents.

It can be filled out and sent to the association, and they'll receive one of these stickers. The only thing lacking on the sticker that will be passed out is the registration number, so it won't be legal for use. As was suggested before, Mr. Speaker, there are indeed problems when a unit is marked with a handicapped sticker on the licence plate or when a licence plate is specially made with the handicapped insignia on it. People face some problems with this. They become a target for ruffians, if you wish to call them that for want of a better or nicer word. There is much concern about that.

I understand that in some of the states they are indeed exploring the idea of getting away from the use of these insignias on licence plates. They have a different or better system for signalling the use of the handicapped person, such as this plaque that I'll distribute. The other thing about the movable plaque is that it can be used not only by handicapped drivers but by handicapped people riding in a vehicle. Mr. Speaker, we see handicapped stalls in front of many places, but there are other problems associated with them.

The people in the two major urban municipalities, Calgary and Edmonton, have worked together with the Paraplegic Association and other handicapped associations in trying to develop some system for handicapped parking. Basically, there are still three problems that exist. We covered one previously: that of the tagged identification of a vehicle and the problems it creates. It leaves the desire in some people's minds to have a portable marking that can be placed in a vehicle whether it is being driven by handicapped people or the handicapped are riding as passengers.

Secondly, possible changes to the Planning Act would establish stan dards of design and agree upon an adequate number of handicapped parking stalls needed for any private devel opment like a store or mall parking lot. Thirdly, we should probably be looking at amending the traffic Act so that the police can give tickets for parking in handicapped parking stalls in those places that have them on private property. There is now really little, if anything, that can be done to enforce parking rights in these marked stalls. Even though they're marked, people park in them.

There's really little that can be done towards stopping people that use these stalls. A resolution was passed at the last urban municipalities conference, Mr. Speaker, and I'd like to read the last part of the resolution into the record. There are the two pream bles, and then:

Now therefore

be it resolved the government of Alberta be requested to introduce enabling legislation to permit municipalities to enforce handicapped parking spaces on private property and to introduce a standard of vehicle identification system to facilitate intraprovincial travel for the disabled. Mr. Speaker, I think that last part of the resolution pretty well says it all: we need to be standardized across the province, not only in the two major cities but in some of the other cities and towns throughout the province.

We need to have a standard insignia that is acceptable in all areas and a way for the police and the cities to enforce the regulations that exist so that it's not made almost like a farce, in some cases, where these stalls exist and people are parking in them. Mr. Speaker, it may be of interest to members of the Assembly to note that to date the Paraplegic Association has issued approximately 3,000 of these placards since the program began one year ago. In some ways it's a large amount, but in other ways there is obviously a lot more needed out there.

As I said, to date this association has, on its own, taken over this program of distribution of the placards. Organizations like the ACT have donated sub— stantial moneys toward construction of these placards, and we are very thankful for that. There is also a problem with the voluntary organization sending out these placards. We have had some concerns about the number of people we are contacting, the number that are touching our organization. We really desire to achieve the best possible distribution of such an item.

We would appreciate the Solicitor General's taking over the distribution of these items under motor vehicles or under some joint arrangement with this association or other asso ciations, so we could have a better handle on the numbers of people who need such a certificate and where they are, and maybe do some joint programs funded partially by the organization and partially by government in order to carry out the intent of the program. In

summary, Mr. Speaker, as I said, I support the concept of having the stalls and having some sort of marking on a handicapped vehicle. But I do have concerns about markings on the licence plates for the reasons I outlined, and I urge members, when they are looking at support of the motion, to consider those concerns. Thank you. MR. LEE: Mr. Speaker, it gives me a great deal of pleasure today to speak to the motion sponsored by the Member for Calgary Mountain View. I wish to commend the hon. member for taking the initiative to bring this subject before

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 69 the Assembly for debate. It is a very worthy subject and one I believe should be addressed at length. In this context I would like to bring to the attention of Members of this Assembly my intention in the near future to introduce a Bill entitled the Disabled Parking Act. I trust that the debate on this Bill will be as constructive as the debate has been thus far on the resolution before us today. Mr. Speaker, parking is a controversial issue, even for those able-bodied people who do not suffer from any dis ability.

As a member of city council I recall a tremendous controversy that existed on the issue of parking and parking policy. It wasn't that long ago that I was doing a tour of churches on a Sunday morning in my ward with the hon. Member for Calgary Millican, who was then an alderman of the city of Calgary. We had visited two churches. We arrived at the third; it was St. Michael's Catholic Church. It was one minute to eleven. There was no parking to be had anywhere, despite the fact that this was a residential area. The time was one minute to eleven, and we had to get into that church.

Of course, I was not about to park in the only space available — beside a fire hydrant. However, my colleague was committed to being on time. He said, "Brian, look; if we get a parking ticket, you can fix it anyway." I said, "You've got to be kidding; I can't even get my own pay raised." He insisted that we depart, so we got out of the car. He took out his business card and wrote on the back of it, "Forgive us our trespasses." He put it underneath the windshield wiper. We went inside and came out an hour and a half later.

I'm certain that the police officer who issued the $25 parking ticket must have been from his constituency, because he wrote on the back of the parking ticket, "Lead us not into temptation." Mr. Speaker, I trust that the disabled will forgive us our trespasses for the unintentional yet benign neglect that we as legislators have given to this subject. But we should not lead them into the temptation of a quick, short solution that is not total and is not co-ordinated, and that is the thrust of my remarks today.

In contributing to this debate, I wish to do three things; first, address myself to six issues and problems which are generally identified with the users of disabled persons' parking identification, as outlined in the Hickling report. This report is entitled A Study of Handicapped Parking Identification and was prepared for Transport Canada in 1982. Secondly, I wish to evaluate this resolution, using this report as a yardstick to measure the merits of the motion.

Finally, I wish to examine the resolution in terms of how it meets the needs of the disabled persons in Alberta based on the feedback I've received as a member of the Legislature. With that said, I would like to begin with the Hickling report, which basically addresses all the issues we were speaking on today. The study was completed in 1982 and provides what I think is a complete overview of parking identification systems presently in use in Canada, the United States, and Europe. Mr.

Speaker, the report addresses six primary issues: standard identification, enforcement, portable transferrable identification, reciprocity, program co-ordina tion and, finally, personal security. Let us deal with these issues one by one. First of all, standard identification. Disabled persons have experienced problems with their parking identification for three primary reasons. First of all, organizations other than official government bodies issue parking identification.

As you know, the Canadian Paraplegic division in Alberta, as identified by the previous speaker, does have a placard system in place in Alberta, as do other organizations. The difficulty is that these systems are not ideal because of the lack of co-ordination between issuing organizations. The lack of standardization in all of this tends to be confusing for both the user and enforcement officials as well. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, the identification is not authorized by government.

It is not authorized by municipal governments, although there has certainly been a close co-ordination between the cities of Calgary and Edmonton. I understand it is not as much a problem in Alberta because the CPA has worked so closely with the two major cities. Mr. Speaker, in preparing the Bill that I will be intro ducing later on, I wrote the cities in Alberta and asked for their comments on the need for co-ordination, and submitted a draft Bill. Here is the feedback.

Mayor Decore responded in February of last year and said: The City of Edmonton supports in principle provincial legislation adopting standards for accessible parking spaces for the handicapped. Clearly the mayor wants to see the details, but there's a recognition that there's a need for provincewide co-ordi nation. Mayor Klein of the city of Calgary also wrote: The City of Calgary supports any effort towards the provision of specially designated parking spaces for the handicapped in all Alberta municipalities. Again, they have been working very closely with the CPA in this regard. Mr.

Speaker, because of points 1 and 2, if disabled drivers use unofficial identification, they can be fined. This is not a big problem. I understand that the hon. Member for Calgary North West brought this to the attention of the Solicitor General a year ago, and the department to this date has received only one complaint. The second issue is enforcement. The report stated that enforcement policies across Canada are presently inadequate. City police and bylaw officers are not empowered to fine violators who occupy handicapped parking reserved in areas on private property.

So while there are good intentions by many owners of parking lots, it is simply ineffective if no action can be taken. Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago on a Sunday evening I attended a cultural event in Chinatown in Calgary. Parking at any time of the week is a challenge in Chinatown in Calgary, and on Sunday it is horrendous. I was driving around in one parking lot on that day, there were at least 10 other automobiles in line to find a stall, and there was one vacant parking stall reserved for the disabled. I noticed all 10 cars passed up parking in that stall except for one. It was a rowdy group of three young men.

It was a half- ton truck. The noise of the radio was loud. It looked as if they had been drinking; they were certainly boisterous. While we could see at the end of the lineup an automobile that did have a placard in it for the disabled, these three young men decided to abuse the privilege that was provided by the parking lot owner and take that parking stall. I can't think of anything more discourteous, ignorant, or totally devoid of common decency than an action of that kind — devoid not only of common decency but of basic human respect.

The bad news in this regard is that with regret a tiny minority of individuals can abuse the spirit and goodwill of the majority. The net effect is that they can totally obliterate the value of the voluntary system that exists today. Unfortunately, it is in this case, because of the abuse of a minority, that I believe there is a requirement for some standardization and giving to municipalities the authority to

70 ALBERTA HANSARD March 19, 1985 fine for the abuse. The good news, of course, is that in my view 99 percent of the public who are aware of this policy of parking stalls for the disabled respect that provision. The third issue, Mr. Speaker, is that of transferrability and portability. User groups across Canada were polled, and they concluded from the review that took place in 1982 that stickers — not necessarily stickers, because they could be stickers or placards — should be (

a) portable and (

b) transferrable. In other words, the disabled ought to be able to utilize the placard or sticker in a vehicle other than the one they own. In some respects that is the system presently in place in Alberta, a placard system that meets both those criteria. It can be placed on the dash or the front windshield. It is beneficial to the disabled driver as well as to the disabled person being driven, as that person may not always be transported in the same vehicle. Mr. Speaker, the fourth issue is reciprocity between provinces and between municipalities.

Clearly, if we are going to have a system, it needs to be co-ordinated between all the communities not only in Alberta and Canada but in North America. I was encouraged to hear the mover of the resolution indicate that there are now 33 states in the United States that have a system of one form or another. But there is a great need for them to be co-ordinated. Mr. Speaker, the fifth issue is program co-ordination. Program co-ordination is another area that the report looks at.

It notes that disabled persons' organizations, particularly in Alberta, have expressed a belief and a desire to be actively involved in co-ordinating any type of parking iden tification programs that would be to their benefit. It makes sense: let's involve the people who are affected. I recall, when serving on Calgary city council in 1980 to '81, that the then administration attempted to bring forward a new bylaw with respect to parking as it impacted upon private building owners — very little consultation undertaken and very little involvement in the preparation of that policy by the people that were affected.

I recall the day that we had the public hearing to consider that new legislation. There was almost a revolt in city council chambers, because the people who were involved were not consulted. As a result, city council threw out the work and said, "Go back to the drawing boards, administration, but this time consult the people who are impacted." It was over two years before that consultation process was completed. But the final result was a policy that had the unanimous endorsement of the private sector and the public sector, and it was undertaken and completed to their mutual agreement.

So clearly, in keeping with the philosophy of this government, we must include and receive input from organizations and encourage their involvement in not only the formulation of the policy but the execution of it. Mr. Speaker, the sixth issue, and probably the most difficult one, is that of personal security. Disabled persons have expressed a clearly spoken fear of being identified as easy targets for the criminal element. With licence plates or stickers which are not portable or transferrable, I believe the problem is exacerbated; it's worse.

While there is a need for identification, the question is: which is more appropriate? As a member of the Calgary Police Commis sion, I recall the delegations that came forward to us and said, "Do something about security in parking structures at night." These were delegations who were fully able — a particular concern on the part of females who felt they were susceptible and easy targets. If all vehicles are clearly marked that they are driven or owned by the disabled, I wonder if we're not setting up these individuals for greater difficulty than they would wish. Mr.

Speaker, I would now like to compare how this resolution meets these concerns. First of all, with respect to standard identification I think the resolution is excellent. It would bring about a standard identification system through out the province and eliminate confusion. I would like to comment, however, that the standard identification system that has been introduced by the Canadian Paraplegic Asso ciation has not brought about a great deal of confusion.

I think one of the strongest arguments for this resolution is that if you did have a licence plate system, it would help to bring about a standardization in rural communities that may not be exposed to the variety of parking lots in larger urban areas that already adopt this present system. With respect to enforcement, I'm afraid this resolution puts the cart before the horse. We could have a standardized licence plate system, but without enforcement I'm afraid it is virtually useless. It doesn't mean the resolution doesn't have merit.

But if anybody can still park in a parking stall for the disabled and not be towed away, it certainly does very little good for those people who wish to utilize this privilege. The Hickling report recommended that organizations of the handicapped should discontinue issuing parking identi fication in order to allow either municipal or provincial governments to co-ordinate this activity. I suggest that any changes in this regard should be a gradual process and should ensure that the needs of the disabled are fully met.

With respect to personal security, I know there is great apprehension on the part of user groups towards licence plates. This very important concern is really not met by this resolution. Finally, I would like to address how the resolution meets the needs of disabled persons across the province. My office has been in contact with Eric Boyd, the executive director of the Canadian Paraplegic Association. I know many members have already received the information pack age. The association has clearly expressed grave reservations with this motion. In their opinion, the licence plate route is not the way to go.

We've also been in touch with the Calgary Action Group for the Disabled, and they, too, have expressed the same reservation. They don't want to be identified as moving targets. In closing, we've examined the following six issues: standard identification, enforcement, the issue of portability or transferrability, reciprocity between other municipalities and governments, program co-ordination, and personal secu rity. We've examined how this resolution deals with the issues. In some areas it is an excellent initiative, but in others it falls short.

When I began my debate, I made reference in my opening story that we should be forgiven for our trespasses in not taking initiative on this earlier. But we should be very careful not to be tempted with a solution that is not complete, not total, and not co-ordinated. Mr. Speaker, I believe a complete solution must deal with 10 basic areas. One, there should be a clear definition of disability and who should do the identification. Should it be government or should it be a private organization?

Secondly, I think there must be a standard throughout the province of a minimum number of stalls that are allowed in parking lots. Should it be a parking lot of 25 or 50 stalls, and what percentage should be allocated for the disabled? Three, how should the stalls be marked? Should there be a standard identification for those parking stalls?

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 71 Four, what degree of local flexibility should there be? Perhaps one municipality would want a greater proportion than another. Five, the placard or portable transferrable sticker should be standardized throughout the province. Six, there should be reciprocity. Seven, and again I regret that this resolution does not address it directly, there must be some kind of penalty for an offence if there's to be any enforcement of disabled parking stalls. A local municipality or private parking lot owner should have the ability to have the offending vehicle towed away.

Eight, there should be close co-ordination between the private sector and government. We should make sure that the program is either administered by or closely consulted in concert with disabled organizations. Nine, there should be joint co-ordination among the four ministries that would be impacted or provide services with respect to such initiative: Municipal Affairs, the Solicitor General, Transportation, and Social Services and Community Health. Above all, Mr. Speaker, I believe the solution should be win, win, win.

It should be a win for disabled groups who have been working on this problem for so long and are looking for a complete solution. It should be a win for municipalities who have been working closely with the disabled groups but are frustrated by the lack of authority to do anything with the problem. Thirdly, it should be a win for the public. I believe there is very strong support for the idea of parking stalls for the convenience of the disabled. Fourthly, there should be a win for parking lot owners who have done so voluntarily thus far but are frustrated by abuse by a small minority.

Finally, it should be a win above all for the disabled, whose life is difficult enough, complicated enough, and challenging enough, with out the frustration of finding a parking stall when they seek to be mobile in their own community. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I believe the resolution is a good one in principle. But because of the lack of complete, co-ordinated effort to deal with the issues I've identified, I think it's incomplete, and therefore at this point, while commending the hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View for his initiative, I cannot support it until these concerns are addressed more closely. MR.

GOGO: Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to participate in the debate on Motion 201, sponsored by the Member for Calgary Mountain View. First of all, I think it is an excellent motion. It's probably long overdue. I listened with great interest to the previous speaker, who indicated that he would support it in principle subject to a lot of conditions. Obviously, if those conditions were to be answered, the hon. member and other members of this House would never have need for any constituents to have this motion, because we should live so long.

It is again an indication that people who want to enshrine at a time when we are trying to deregulate, legislate at a time when we are asking for the spirit of volunteerism and co-operation, put before this House what I deem to be an excellent idea in spirit, an excellent idea in terms of someone who wants to help the . . . I don't know how many of those 1.7 million licensed drivers in this province are handicapped. But I do think that we're seeing another example of — and it's happened before; we did it with child restraint devices — endeavouring, in terms of spirit, to help people in this province.

Then we get into the debate and end up with recommendations that would be academic if they were carried out because there probably wouldn't be automobiles available at the time that the legislation is passed. Mr. Speaker, both members have mentioned Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia, who took initiative and have these symbols on the plates. I recall the debate here a year or two ago, when we talked about the vulnerability of those who were disabled.

For example, if somebody who had a licence plate with the symbol of the disabled on it broke down on the highway, were they vulnerable to some of those types the member from Calgary Buffalo referred to? We would omit the word "young", because the inference is that young people are always troublemakers. He referred to some who had obviously been to a corner grocery store. They had been drinking, they were noisy, and they were a variety of things. Mr.

Speaker, I think a very real concern lies with those who would have a disabled sign on their plate and would break down on the highway, particularly in the wintertime, and be vulnerable to passersby. That's a concern. For many years the United States used plates. The state of Arizona is probably one of the best known. In reading the motion, I have no trouble at all supporting it, as long as we don't insist that those who are disabled have to have it. Obviously, it's only on application. You would have to apply to receive that plate. Mr.

Speaker, the use of the symbol brought in by the previous Attorney General, with the co-operation of the Canadian Paraplegic Association, is an excellent one. I look forward to using mine, as I'm sure other members of the House do, being that they've been issued to the members of the House for those who are physically disabled. This brings us to the point in the resolution of who is disabled. It doesn't refer to physically disabled.

I think the Member for Calgary Mountain View is referring, by infer ence, to those who have a physical condition, such as emphysema, and cannot get to the store from wherever they have to park, or to those without legs or some real physical infirmity. Mr. Speaker, I have no difficulty at all supporting this resolution. I think we should move quickly. By moving and endorsing this motion by the Member for Calgary Mountain View, we'd set another example that this is a government that's noted for its action, not a government creating more regulation. MR. SZWENDER: Mr.

Speaker, I would also like to participate in the debate on Motion 201, presented by the Member for Calgary Mountain View. I must commend him on bringing the motion to the Assembly at this time. It shows the true intent and spirit that is behind it. It certainly is a motion worthy of debate on the floor of the Assembly. It's always a difficult task to follow speeches made by the Member for Lethbridge West and the Member for Calgary Buffalo. They seem to cover all topics on an extended basis, and many of the points that I was hoping to make have already been covered very adequately.

I would like to add a couple of points to the debate. One of the things the Member for Calgary Buffalo referred to was the lack of courtesy displayed by members of the public when it comes to parking stalls reserved for the handicapped. His experience a week ago, when a number of uncouth youths seemed to have taken a spot away from a handicapped driver, reminded me of the promo that's aired on television quite frequently promoting a program

72 ALBERTA HANSARD March 19, 1985 entitled, I believe, Highway to Heaven. It stars — I don't know what his real name is, but he used to be Little Joe on Bonanza. He plays some kind of angel who returns from heaven. He was walking in a parking lot and a couple of thug-type guys had parked in a handicapped spot. He asked them to move their vehicle, and of course they refused, not knowing exactly who he was. When they returned, the vehicle had been turned upside down and parked on its roof. These gentlemen were quite alarmed.

I don't know if the Member for Calgary Buffalo thought of using that as an option in removing the offending vehicle, but certainly that was something he could have considered. A couple of years ago, Mr. Speaker, as a member of this Assembly, I was able to sponsor another Bill that was to assist the handicapped people of this province. That was

an Act to amend the Blind Persons' Rights Act, which would have extended to deaf people the same privileges extended to blind people with respect to hearing ear dogs and assisting those handicapped people. As such, I had quite extensive contact with handicapped individuals throughout the province, and I certainly became much more empathetic and aware of their needs. I received a phone call one day from a constituent of mine who complained that he couldn't get a hunting licence. I asked him why, and he said that he was blind. I wondered what a blind person was going to do with a hunting licence.

I had a few suggestions as to where he could go hunting, but that wasn't the point. He said that as a blind person, he should have a bag limit for ducks or whatever else he wanted to go after. Certainly, he wasn't going to operate the gun, but he wanted to be able to go out with bona fide hunters who would be able to bag his limit on his behalf, so he could bring back his own game or fowl or whatever he was hunting. That was certainly an interesting point that I had never considered. I looked into it for him with the minister and was able to satisfy his needs.

I also have a friend who is blind and owns a couple of vehicles, Mr. Speaker. It always amazes me what a blind person is going to be able to do with motor vehicles. Quite often I think we underestimate the abilities of hand icapped people. The blind person doesn't drive his own vehicle; he gets others to drive it for him in order to take him out in the country or on business or skiing or whatever. We should be very aware of the needs and abilities of handicapped people. [Mr.

Speaker in the Chair] Certainly, the spirit of this motion allows us to look at all the various possibilities that those of us who are not handicapped may never really think about or be aware of One of the difficulties I had when I was looking at this motion was the definition that could be applied to a disabled or handicapped person. The information that I was able to go through offered a number of possibilities, and they were very wide-ranging. In some very open

interpretations in jurisdictions like California, it even included people who were temporarily disabled, people who had broken legs or other limbs. As long as they were under medical attention or wearing casts, they were considered handicapped. Other provinces that have dealt with this question have defined "disabled". For the purposes of this program, Mr. Speaker, I think we would have to call a disability any physical condition of a permanent nature which constitutes a serious hardship to mobility.

This is intended to include paraplegics, quad raplegics, the blind, people with respiratory ailments, and other physical conditions which in the opinion of a duly qualified medical practitioner require inclusion. If that kind of definition could be adopted, I think it would be much more easily applied and members of the Assembly would be much more easily able to come to grips with a decision as to the viability of this motion, because a number of concerns have been raised by previous speakers. With regard to the time, Mr.

Speaker, and the number of comments that I would like to include, I would like to adjourn debate at this time. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? I'm sorry, I didn't hear. The hon. member asked for leave to adjourn the debate? Is that the motion? MR. SZWENDER: Yes. MR. SPEAKER: Does the Assembly agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. SPEAKER: It is so ordered. 202. Moved by Mr. Hyland:

Be it resolved that the government of Alberta be encouraged to consider appointing a committee comparable to the recently appointed Montana-Western Canadian Provinces Boundary Advisory Committee to discuss common interests with the state of Montana and the province of Alberta. MR. HYLAND: Mr. Speaker, perhaps you'll get a chance to call the question when this motion ends, at the appropriate time. It's a pleasure to participate and move Motion 201. Mr. Speaker, I should first say that there is a slight error in the motion in that the committee spoken of is not fully appointed.

The Act has been through the state House of Representatives and through the Senate, and was amended by the Senate. I'll talk about the amendment later. It now has to return to the House of Representatives and then receive the governor's signature. The intent of the motion is there, but the wording isn't totally accurate. Mr. Speaker, I should just briefly go over the history of the exchanges that have occurred between the legislators in the province of Alberta and in the state of Montana. It started a little over a year and a half ago.

I went down and met with Dennis Iverson, who is the member for Whitlash, which borders on part of the constituency of Cypress and is against the American border. In fact, his land runs along the border. I discussed this idea of an exchange of legislators with some of my colleagues, especially those in the agriculture caucus committee. From our desire to talk about the common problems that occur in agriculture, I posed this idea to the member. He thought it was a good idea, and the situation grew from that.

A meeting was held in Edmonton in March 1984 between legislators from Montana, from both Houses and both parties — two from the Senate and two from the House of Representatives, each one of those being from various parties — along with some limited staff from the 49th Parallel Institute and from other organizations. We met and talked about common issues. I believe other members are going to cover those. We met in Great Falls in October 1984, for a return trip. At that time Governor Ted Schwinden announced at

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 73 a luncheon held for both groups, and sponsored by the Great Falls Chamber of Commerce, the intent to put a Bill before both Houses of the state so that such a committee could be put together and be available to discuss common border interests with Alberta, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia. Mr. Speaker, I know there have been exchanges of ministers from Alberta, and from other provinces, with Montana.

But I believe the two exchanges of legislators which we have carried out so far — and hopefully these exchanges will continue — are the first times that legislators at that level have met across the border between Canada and the United States. Briefly, Mr. Speaker, the Bill outlines the makeup of this committee from Montana. Their committee would be composed of nine members and would be chaired by the governor. Of the other eight members, four would be appointed from Legislative Council, two from the Senate, and two from the House of Representatives.

So it would give them a fairly wide range to appoint people from, to discuss the problems and the things they wish to talk about. The Bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on February 9 and received a unanimous vote. Interestingly enough, Mr. Speaker, it shows the interest and support this Bill has received, in that the announcement that this com mittee would be formed was made by a Democrat governor. The Bill was introduced into the Assembly by Mr. Iverson, a Republican.

It received total support, to the best of my understanding, from the House of Representatives, and when it hit the Senate, only one change was made. Then, of course, it received the unanimous support of the Senate. My understanding of laws passed in Montana is that once they are passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor, they become law in October of that year. This Bill was amended to say that it will automatically become law when it receives the signature of the governor. So they moved the timing up. They were very interested in having this committee appointed and working before the October deadline.

Mr. Speaker, I won't lay out any guidelines in my speech as to what I think would be an appropriate number of people on such a committee or what that committee should talk about. That's why I have referred to it being similar to the committee in Montana. I think the numbers and who should appear on that committee are things that can be talked about and agreed upon at a later time. Mr.

Speaker, some of the topics that could be discussed by this committee were discussed at our two meetings in very shallow detail; such things as the movement of cattle across the border and the effect it has on the industry in both areas, the movement of grain, the movement of many things across the border. We spent a short time on better student exchange, north and south, so that students at secondary educational institutes would better understand the systems of government and the way both countries, both provinces and states, work.

The discussion of water: above ground water, river water, movement of water through the province of Alberta and the state of Montana, the movement of water in aquifers and the effect activities taking place in one area have on the aquifer on the other side of the border. Mr. Speaker, I think these kinds of things could be talked about. One thing that is important to people on both sides of the border is the spread of knapweed. In Alberta we have spent a lot of time and money on the control of knapweed, which is a very obnoxious weed that can totally take over a crop or grassland.

In Montana they have a very serious problem with that; indeed, they've lost pro duction of some land because of the takeover of that weed. These kinds of things could be talked about. At the present time there is a signed memorandum of understanding between Alberta and Montana. It's concerned with co-operation in research for the control of dryland salinity. Some of these things have started, but at the level of such a committee, I think we could get more into policy items and how they affect governments on both sides of the border. With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge members to support this motion. Thank you. MR.

THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker, I heartily endorse Motion 202, and I commend the Member for Cypress for bringing it to the attention of the Legislature. I think it's timely that it's brought forward at this time, because since last Sep tember there seems to be a noticeable warming of relations between Canada and the United States. I regret that in the 15 years before that, we did a lot of things to make that relationship fairly cool. So I think this is a very timely motion, and it's something that I think members of the Legislature should support.

I'd like to take just a couple of minutes for members who are not directly involved with the international border. There are a few things that go on down there that possibly they don't understand. When you get about 100 miles north of the international border, the real impact of it is not quite as apparent as it is to those of us along the border, which includes the mover of the motion, the Member for Cypress; the Hon. Bob Bogle, the Member for Taber-Warner; and myself. For instance, we have a sports relationship with Montana.

We have a team from Billings in the western junior hockey league, and we have a team from Lethbridge that plays in the American Legion baseball league down there. So there is a relationship that way. Then we go to the natives. I have a big reserve in my area. Directly across the border they have a big Blackfoot Reserve at Browning. There is a real relationship and a lot of travel back and forth between those two reserves, and the Peigans, too, because they're all basically Blackfoot people. The line cut across their area, so they travel back and forth and intermarry, and there is quite a relationship.

Then of course we get to the national parks. In the end of my constituency we have Waterton Lakes; they have Glacier park in Montana. They abut each other and are called the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park. There's a real relationship between the personnel who work in those parks; they work together. A lot of wildlife goes back and forth, so there is quite an impact on that. Glacier county is directly south of the MD of Cardston and is a very sparsely populated area.

They do not have the same type of hospital facilities we have in Alberta, and many people in Glacier county come across the border to the Cardston hospital. They come to Cardston and Lethbridge for dental work. So in areas like that we have quite a friendly relationship with Montana. In the dry years Montana ranchers come up to the irrigated areas of Alberta to buy hay. I understand that this year 3,000 tons of barley came from Montana to southern Alberta to help alleviate the feed situation. So there's another area where we work together. I talked about transportation once before, many years ago.

The Burlington Northern Railroad runs about 40 miles south of the line, and in actual fact I live about 70 miles

74 ALBERTA HANSARD March 19, 1985 by road from Cut Bank, where the transcontinental line goes through. I live 140 miles from Calgary, where the main line of the CPR goes through. I suspect that in the future, as the benefits of the Crow Rate disappear, you will see people in southern Alberta looking towards Bur lington Northern more than they have in the past as an alternate route for grain transportation to the coast. I hope they can, because I think there can be some savings there. We as a province have had a good history of working closely with the Pacific northwest.

I went to a conference called WASDA, the Western Association of State Depart ments of Agriculture. There are 15 western states in that association. We are an associate member and go to their conferences and support it. It's amazing that when you go to one of those conferences, you hear the same problems cropping up there that we have in Alberta: grain marketing and transportation. I think it does us good if we can sit down and talk to people about those kinds of things. The Member for Cypress mentioned Russian knapweed, and I mentioned that Glacier county is sparsely populated.

There is a terrific infestation of leafy spurge and Russian knapweed in the northern part of Glacier county. There are two rivers that come across the boundary there, the Milk and the St. Mary. When they flood, they bring in weed seeds, and we're starting to get pockets of these weeds across the border in Alberta. If there's one thing I would like to see us do, it's get together with the state of Montana. Even if we put some money into cutting down on that infestation of Russian knapweed just across our border, it will help us a great deal in holding it back in this part of the country.

I don't know if that would work politically, but it sure would be an economic advantage for us. Just a couple of other things, Mr. Speaker. I don't know how this commission will be set up, because the Montana commission is going to deal with B.C., Alberta, and Sas katchewan. We're just looking at it from the Alberta point of view. Obviously, if it's set up, time will tell how it works. Possibly we will have a commission that works with them, B.C. will have one that talks about forestry, and Saskatchewan will talk about their problems.

I'd like to close on one note, to show what has happened in the past because we didn't have this type of commu nication. In the '50s the Social Credit government built a road from Cardston, through Aetna, and down to Whiskey Gap. The state of Montana was going to bring a road up from Cut Bank to Whiskey Gap. We built the road and paved it, and they never got around to doing their end. Basically, it just dropped off to nothing down there. I think closer co-operation — either we wouldn't have built the road in the first place or it would have been continued.

So the residents of that area have enjoyed a well-paved road, but it just stops at the line, and that's it. I urge all members to support this motion, and thank you for your attention, Mr. Speaker. MR. STROMBERG: May I ask a question of the Member for Cardston? It is my understanding that the majority of the people from Cardston and Lethbridge go to Great Falls to get their Christmas shopping bargains, and everyone from Great Falls comes to Lethbridge and Cardston, believing they're getting an equal bargain. Is that true? MR. THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker, to the Member for Cam- rose.

It used to be, but with the 70-cent dollar there are not too many people going south. MR. MUSGROVE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a few comments about Motion 202. I would certainly like to commend the Member for Cypress for introducing a Bill such as this. As a member of the agriculture caucus, I can certainly see a lot of advantage in having a committee to deal specifically with Montana, but it could include some of the other western states. The purpose of the committee is to deal with issues that affect the boundary.

I was at a midwest governors' con ference in Lincoln, Nebraska, last winter, and there were people there from Montana, as representatives on that com mittee. I could certainly see a lot of advantages in our communicating to those people some of the things that go on in Canada. I happened to come across a piece of paper that they were passing around showing all the things that were subsidized in Canada, in Alberta in particular.

One of the things I noted on that paper was that these people were saying that the grain port in Prince Rupert was entirely paid for by the Alberta government and was a free shipping dock for western grain producers in Canada. If we could bring those things to light and get the people to know what actually happened with such things as the Prince Rupert shipping docks, we would do a lot of good for our agri cultural industry.

I see this as probably a very small follow- up to what President Reagan and Prime Minister Mulroney have been doing; that is, trying to get Canada and the United States on better working and trade relations. I certainly think that's a good idea. Also, Montana feels a bit like western Canada; they feel there's western alienation in the government. Working together, I think we could alleviate that in both nations.

Agriculturally Alberta and Montana are quite similar; they're mostly growers of grain and beef But in the meeting with the representatives from Montana that I was at, they felt they would be a lot better off if they were to trade straight across the line with Alberta. They said that most of their feeder cattle are shipped to the midwest and fattened and slaughtered and the beef is shipped back to Montana. They said it would be a lot easier if they could just ship them to Lethbridge, to the irrigation district, and have them fattened and slaughtered and the beef moved back.

The problem with borders, and particularly with cattle, has been warble control. For the last 25 years, I think, I've been involved in trying to make Alberta a warble-free province. I understand that Montana has been working the same way. I see no problem because of warbles at this time, with the passage of livestock across the border. They mentioned that they had something they called "blue tongue", that we haven't heard of, but I don't think it's a very serious thing. It would probably be something we would look at. Most of the things about the committee have been said.

The co-operative effort in educating people on salinity has certainly been an improvement and a benefit to the people and can be improved yet. They now have an education program where any information on dryland soil salinity is passed back and forth across the border, and both countries benefit from it. Knapweed was mentioned. When I was on county council, they had a tour of Montana and B.C. about knapweed. Unfortunately, I didn't make the tour, but I heard a lengthy report about it.

Those people felt that we should make every effort to keep Alberta free from knapweed, the same as we have, until now, kept it free from rats. It is probably a worse nuisance than rats. The makeup of the committee, I think, would probably have to be something equal to the Montana group. They

March 19, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 75 will be dealing with B.C. and Saskatchewan, although I certainly believe that Saskatchewan and Alberta have a lot in common that they can discuss with Montana also. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say first that in culture or history Montana and Alberta have a lot in common. For instance, the entry into the Northwest Ter ritories at one time was through Montana. It was shipped up the Mississippi River and freighted through Montana into Alberta. The I.G. Baker Co. at that time set up a warehouse in Calgary. It was a Montana-based company.

The other thing about the culture is that my favourite artist, Charlie Russell — I'm not sure if he was a native of Montana or Alberta, but he certainly lived in both provinces. Some of the oldtimers I knew as a youth actually knew Charlie Russell when he lived in Alberta. A memorial to Charlie Russell is built in Great Falls, Montana, and a lot of his paintings are housed there. Mr. Speaker, this is a very good motion. I think there is some urgency in dealing with it, so I encourage everybody to vote in favour of it. MR. CAMPBELL: Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure to speak to Motion 202.

I'd like to congratulate the Member for Cypress for bringing it before the Assembly today. To go into some of the detail of how this particular meeting of the agriculture caucus committee and the legislative representatives from Montana evolved, through the process we had meetings with Saskatchewan and Manitoba. At those meetings the committee from Saskatchewan mentioned the fact that they had had meetings with North Dakota.

So from that point, we discussed it and thought it would be very helpful if Alberta could meet with the Montana rep resentatives and eventually pull Manitoba, Saskatchewan, North Dakota, and Montana together for one meeting and enlarge the involvement of the different committees. The meeting that comes to mind — the hon. Member for Cypress mentioned the fact that it was March, but it was February 26, 27, and 28 of '84. Just to give you some idea of the participation from Montana, I'd like to mention a few of the Senators and Representatives. Heading the delegation was Representative Dennis Iverson, a Republican.

He's a farmer and rancher. His district borders on Alberta, as the previous speaker mentioned. He's chairman of the Environmental Quality Council, which is a permanent legislative agency charged with overseeing the implementation of natural resource pro grams and reporting on environmental quality. He's also a member of the Natural Resources Committee, the Judiciary Committee, and the Select Committee on Water Marketing. Representative Rex Manuel is a Democrat.

He's chairman of the appropriations subcommittee and vice-chairman of the Appropriations Committee, chairman of the Legislative Council, and is in charge of bill drafting and committee staffing. Representative Hal Harper, a Democrat, a carpenter from Helena, is chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee. Representative Bob Marks, Republican, a rancher and in real estate, from Helena is minority leader of the House. Senator Jack Galt, Republican, a rancher from central Montana, is chairman of the Committee on Committees, which appoints members to committees.

Senator Allen Kol- stad, a Republican, is a rancher, and he borders on Alberta. He's the president problem of the Senate, chairman of the Business and Industry Committee and of the Legislative Administration Committee. He's also vice-chairman of the Agriculture, Livestock and Irrigation Committee. Senator Dorothy Eck, a Democrat and businesswoman, is a member of the Environmental Quality Council and Natural Resources and Taxation committees. Senator Joe Mazurek,

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19850319
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L20 S3 19850319 1430 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	090414b0c70ccb94dc8e8904b0fae235cb086d26

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (json).