April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 885 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Tuesday, April 27, 1976 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to introduce two Members of Parliament, along with executive members of the national Social Credit organization. The Members of Parliament are Mr. Gilbert Rondeau and Mr. Andre Fortin. Other members of the nation­ al executive are Mr. Albert Bourcier, Mr. Jerry Beck, Mr. Pierre Brazeau, and Claude Vallee. I'd like them to stand and be recognized. MR. YOUNG: Mr.

Speaker, it's my pleasure to introduce to you and to members of the House, some students from my constituency. It's perhaps especial­ ly significant that these students should be present on an afternoon when the Assembly will debate the basic goals and priorities of education. Mr. Speaker, the students come from Grade 10 at the Edmonton Christian High School. As members may know, the parents pay tuition to that school in the difference of between 40 per cent and the balance of expenditure. Mr. Speaker, it's my pleas­ ure to introduce, with the students, their teachers, Miss Joanne Romyn, Mr.

Jack Van Der Pol, and Miss Trudy Rozema. I'd ask the students in both galleries to stand and be recognized. MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, I wish to take this opportunity to introduce to you, and through you to the members of the Assembly, some 21 Grade 6 students from Beverly Heights School which my constituency is actually named after. Visiting the Assembly this afternoon, they are accompanied by Norman Holt. I would ask that they rise and receive the usual welcome of the Assembly. head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. RUSSELL: Mr.

Speaker, I wish to table the answer to Motion for a Return No. 101. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Energy Policy MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my first question to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. It is with regard to the national energy policy that I understand was announced today in Ottawa. Would the minister indicate to this House how the federal government's recently announced national energy policy will change the provincial energy devel­ opment policy at the present time? What effect will that have? MR. GETTY: Mr.

Speaker, the document which has been released in the federal Parliament today is very detailed. I've only had it for a relatively short period of time, although much of the content is the result of federal-provincial discussions on energy matters over the last year. [In] such a short period of time it's very difficult to give an analysis. Some of the conclusions indicate to me that the federal government has indeed accepted arguments which Alberta has been making, and continues to accept them. I would want to analyse other matters further. So, on such short notice, Mr.

Speaker, it's very difficult for me to provide the hon. member with any detailed assessment of this document, or how it will affect Alberta in the future. Hopefully, over a period of time, it will be a good document for continued discussions between our­ selves and the federal government. By the way, the document is entitled An Energy Strategy for Canada, and it has options, not necessarily decisions. I believe any energy strategy for Canada would have to be best developed if it has the confidence and support of Alberta in that development.

Hopefully, we will be able to do that, but it will depend on its contents. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. In the document the federal government placed before you, I understand that a goal is to reduce the energy consumption growth rate to less than 3.5 per cent in 10 years. Has the minister or the provincial government been consulted on this particular objective? Does the provincial government support that objective? MR. GETTY: We've been consulted with regard to that target, as they refer to it, Mr. Speaker.

It's really part of the program of energy conservation at the consumer level that the federal government wish to bring into effect in Canada. Really, they are talking about cutting out waste and merely ending up with efficient use. That policy of reducing waste and having efficient use of energy is one with which we have no problem. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, further to the minister. The booklet also indicates the intent to double exploration activity in frontier areas within the next three years.

Would this mean an extension and an expansion of the provincial and federal government incentives for exploration by oil companies in Alberta? MR. GETTY: I couldn't speak for the federal govern­ ment in terms of incentives they may have in their areas, Mr. Speaker, but I can speak for Alberta, and indicate that the Alberta incentives introduced in December 1974 have worked very dramatically. As most members are aware, Alberta is the one area in Canada where there is a dramatic increase in exploration and development.

Right now, other than working towards increased prices so there are suffi­ cient returns and cash flow for additional oil and gas

886 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976 development, I see no need for Alberta to change programs at this time. MR. R. SPEAKER: A supplementary to the minister. In his preliminary observation of the report, does the minister feel that, in order to carry out development in these frontier areas, there will potentially be a greater role for the Alberta Energy Company in the exploration effort? MR. GETTY: It would just be speculation on my part, Mr. Speaker. I certainly believe that, within Alberta, there will be a very important role for the Alberta Energy Company. Beyond that, I wouldn't like to speculate. MR. R.

SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementa­ ry in this area. Has the minister had any indication from the federal government that they see an extended role for PetroCan in the development of this frontier area? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, PetroCan is a responsibili­ ty of the federal government, and not one for which I take any responsibility. DR. BUCK: A supplementary to the minister, Mr. Speaker.

In light of the fact that at the annual meeting the Alberta Energy Company didn't exactly say that they'd be involved in exploration, can the minister indicate at this time if there have been any directions from the provincial government? Will the Alberta Energy Company be proceeding directly with drilling and exploration? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, the government's policy on that matter with regard to the Alberta Energy Company has never changed. They are not to partici­ pate in exploration in the conventional oil and gas industry in our province.

There is, of course, the unique project at Suffield we have placed within the company. But other than that, there has been no change. In reviewing a copy of comments made in a speech at the annual meeting, it seemed to me the president of the Alberta Energy Company stated it very clearly. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the last supplementary on this topic. DR. BUCK: To the Minister of Utilities and Tele­ phones, Mr. Speaker, in light of the report we've been discussing the energy situation. The University of Alberta seems to be using computers to start turning out some of the lights.

I was wondering if the minister is considering some directive to AGT to turn out some of the lights in the AGT tower, to help reduce that deficit we have. DR. WARRACK: Mr. Speaker, I'd be prepared to take that matter under advisement. It's a potentially important question. As a matter of fact, it brings to mind the important resolution on the Order Paper by the hon. Member for Lacombe. I'd welcome all members' viewpoints on that occasion. Wage and Price Controls MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my second question is to the Premier.

The federal government's Anti- Inflation Board has now extended its monitoring and control function to in excess of 80,000 incorporated companies, which include professionals, medium- sized companies, and major corporations. My question to the Premier: after six months of wage and price control, does the government support the federal government's policy of steadily increasing its controls over the economic and business life in Canada? If this is not the government's policy, what discussions have taken place to indicate the Alberta government's point of view with regard to this matter? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, that's a very relevant question, but I think that because the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs has been charged by the Executive Council with the administra­ tion of the Alberta government's participation in that matter, it should await his presence in the House. I'll take notice of it, so he's prepared to answer when he returns. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the Premier. Will this be one of the key questions at the first ministers' conference tomorrow? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, as we've explained earlier in the House, the meeting of western premiers has an agenda.

It involves five different matters: transportation, agriculture, fiscal arrangement, west­ ern provinces' industrial co-operation, and the constitution. Indirectly, there would naturally be a discussion with regard to the federal anti-inflation program, but as we hope for it to be of a short-term nature, it would be incidental to the other matters being discussed. Dairy Industry MR. BATIUK: Mr. Speaker, not too long ago the federal Minister of Agriculture forecast a rosy future in milk production, and encouraged people to increase their production. Now the trend has reversed, and quotas will be cut. Mr.

Speaker, if those who increased their produc­ tion get a cut of some percentage, they may be better off than they were a couple of years ago. But a cut now could put out of business those who didn't raise their production because they couldn't or didn't want to. Would these people who didn't raise their produc­ tion be protected in any way? MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure I fully understand the hon. member's question, but I would make the following comments.

From 12:30 until 2:30 today, I met the chairman and members of the Dairy Control Board and its policy advisory committee, regarding how we might best allocate among produc­ ers the quota which has been allocated to the province of Alberta from the global total in Canada. That meeting is taking the form of being sure we follow the principle that producers would as much as

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 887 possible be treated equally in the allocation of market-share quota, regardless of whether they've been in business for five years, one year, or perhaps only three months. Without having the final figures yet, Mr. Speaker, I could add that it appears that a reduction in the neighborhood of 10 to 15 per cent of market-share quota will be required by all producers. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the hon. minister could advise the Assembly what the minister means by being "treated equally", in view of the fact that we have larger producers, smaller producers, some who have been in business for part of the year, and what have you. MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, the formula with regard to the distribution of either fluid milk quota used or industrial milk quota used on other occasions in other provinces has been to provide the producer with a quota based on his production for the previous 12 months.

In this province in the course of the last dairy year, in fact, we had 198 new producers entering the business who did not produce for the entire dairy year. Those people produced all the way from one month to 11 months throughout the year. By way of example, I would say that the quota for the coming year for an individual who began produc­ tion during the last three or four months of the dairy year with 30 cows or whatever, would be based on an average monthly production of the months that he was in production times twelve.

So he would be provided with a quota nearly equal to his production capabilities at the end of the dairy year that we've just finished. Of course, Mr. Speaker, that would be subject to the 10 to 15 per cent global reduction I talked about. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for St. Paul with a supplementary. MR. FLUKER: My question has been answered, Mr. Speaker. DR. BUCK: A supplementary.

In light of the fact that the quotas have been reduced, can the minister indicate if many people who are indebted to ADC are lobbying the minister to indicate that they have a problem, and possibly some of those loans could be delayed? MR. NOTLEY: What's the line-up? MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact I don't believe I have yet received one request from a dairy producer for a delay in payments or interest as a result of the new quotas which may be announced. I would have been surprised in fact if I had, because we've only had the federal dairy policy announcement for less than two weeks.

Without our being able yet to announce how we're going to allocate quota in Alberta, those people don't know what kind of difficulties they have. In fact, the principle I described earlier, Mr. Speak­ er, in answer to a question from the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview about providing new producers in the business with a quota somewhere near what it should be in relation to their production on March 31, will hopefully leave those people new to the business and who are financed through the Ag. Development Corporation or by other means, in a position where they're able to meet their obligations.

I say as well, Mr. Speaker, that I'm hopeful that the matter of market-share allocation and the formulas used within this province can be resolved this week. At the moment I'm anticipating making a statement in that regard on Friday. Quebec Oil and Gas Leases MR. TAYLOR: My question is to the hon. Minister of Energy. Has the Government of Quebec or any of its agents applied for or taken out oil or gas leases in Alberta? MR. GETTY: Yes, Mr. Speaker. An agency of the Government of Quebec is participating in active exploration within the province. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary.

Did the Government of Quebec receive permits exactly the same as any other company? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, at this stage the agency is participating with other companies. I'm not sure whether they have actually applied for leases. I think the hon. member may be referring to an application for leases direct ownership. I would have to check into that. To the best of my knowledge, as of now they are participating with other companies that hold leases in Alberta. I'd have to check whether they are in fact applying for leases on their own part. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary.

Are all the leases presently held in southern Alberta? MR. GETTY: I would have to check that as well, Mr. Speaker. Environmental Standards Violations MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct this question to the hon. Attorney General, and ask if he can advise the Assembly whether he's received a recommendation from the criminal justice

section of his department that charges be laid against Great Canadian Oil Sands for exceeding provincially imposed standards of SO2 emissions. MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, whether or not I have received recommendations to proceed with charges against any individual or body corporate is not a matter which I would be prepared to discuss in the Legislature. What I would be prepared to discuss is a decision, once taken. The hon. member obviously is aware that this matter is being looked at by members of my staff. It's a matter that's being discussed.

When a decision has been made, I'd be quite happy to explain to the House why we did or did not take certain action. But I could not discuss in the House at this time the merit or substance of the recommendations. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion to the hon. minister. Is the minister in a position

888 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976 to advise the Assembly what timetable the depart­ ment is looking at, at this particular stage? MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, it's true that some interests have been known to the department and have asked to consult me. I've asked them to consult people in the department on the subject. Some material is being examined and evaluated by my department. That evaluation is not yet complete. I will be involved in some discussions with both my staff and my colleagues. At a later date, we'll be in a position to indicate what our action, if any, might be. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion to the hon. minister. Has the government developed any overall policy with respect to preferring charges against corporations that have broken pro­ vincial statutes? By overall policy, I mean a period of grace or a number of violations which would be allowed to go by the board before prosecution takes place or before preferment of charges. Mr. Speaker, the question relates to whether any overall policy with respect to this matter has been developed by government. MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, certainly I have not put into place any overall policy.

If I were addressing my mind to that sort of policy consideration, my first reaction would be that each individual case must be examined carefully on its own merit, and that it would be very difficult to develop a sweeping policy that would apply in all circumstances to all cases. There­ fore, my approach would be to review the circum­ stances of each case to determine, first of all, whether there is sufficient evidence to justify the bringing of a prosecution. Even in that circumstance, there might be other circumstances that would cause us to consider other courses of action.

Generally speaking, all individuals and corporations are subject to the same measure of the law and law enforcement as anyone else. That applies to bodies corporate and individuals. I admit, however, that there are circumstances under which we determine not to prosecute certain individuals and certain corpo­ rations. But as each individual case obviously is different from others, it can only be explained in the context of the circumstances of each case, and I'd be happy to do that at the time. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the hon. minister.

In the case of The Clean Air Act, is there automatic consultation with officials of the Department of the Environment or the minister before any decision is made with respect to the preferment of charges? MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the act that was mentioned, the officials of the Department of the Environment certainly would be in a position to bring infractions to the attention of law enforcement agencies. Those agencies, after proper investigation, would be in a position to prefer charges.

The only reason this matter came to my attention was that my office was contacted directly by certain individuals. As a result, I became part of the consid­ eration. Prior to being contacted by these individuals, I was not involved in any discussions on this particu­ lar subject. Bear Control MR. SHABEN: My question, Mr. Speaker, is to the Minister of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife. I was wondering if the minister could indicate if any initia­ tives have been taken to control black bears near bee yards, particularly in the Peace River region of Alberta. MR. ADAIR: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

If I may, I should go back just a little bit with my answer. In 1974, a subsidy program for electric fences saw some 200 fences constructed around the various bee yards last year and 250 the first year. That program is still in effect. I would suggest that possibly my colleague, the Minister of Agriculture, may want to respond a little further relative to the available subsidy. MR. SHABEN: A supplementary question. In the event that beekeepers suffer damages as a result of black bears, is there any program of compensation available? MR. MOORE: Mr.

Speaker, first of all I would say that the fencing program remains in place. It's really an incentive to commercial beekeepers throughout the province to fence bee yards so the Minister of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife isn't faced with the problem of exterminating bears to the extent we've had to in some years. Mr. Speaker, there are no provisions for compen­ sation to individual beekeepers who suffer damage as a result of black bears. Agricultural Leases MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Minister of Energy and Natural Resources.

Would the minister indicate the department's policy regarding renewing permit leases on agricultural owned Crown land, when more than one application is received? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. member be a little more detailed in his question? MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Speaker, I'm referring to agricultural leases by permit which are up for renewal. What is the policy of the government when it gets more than one application for renewal of the lease? MR. GETTY: Mr.

Speaker, if it's a straight renewal and there is more than one application, the govern­ ment tries to make an individual assessment as to who is most suited to receive the lease. An interim decision is made. The applicants are advised of that interim decision. That decision can be appealed to a local appeal board, made up of the local agricultural development committee. If the appeal is upheld, the application is filled and the applicant gets the lease. MR. MANDEVILLE: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In the case of more than one application, what consideration is given to the previous holder of a lease?

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 889 MR. GETTY: I think, Mr. Speaker, each case would be treated on its own merits. I would have to have a specific reference from the hon. member to get him those details. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for St. Paul followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton Norwood. MR. FLUKER: My question was answered, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: I was sure the hon. member had an inquiring look. Drivers' Licences MRS. CHICHAK: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the hon. Solicitor General.

Can the hon. minister advise whether his recently announced poli- cy of recognizing driver-training school diplomas in the granting of drivers' licences has now been changed, whereby the schools would act as official examiners on behalf of the government, as it current­ ly appears to be understood by the public? MR. FARRAN: Mr. Speaker, I'd be happy to clarify that. There's a subtle difference between the plan in Alberta and the recognized authority plan in B. C. and Quebec. This may be where the confusion arises.

The proposal here is that the driving schools have their diplomas recognized, not that they become private driving examiners operating as testing agen­ cies for the government. The government will merely recognize the diploma of an accredited driving school in lieu of a test. The driving schools that apply for this privilege will be required to allow government inspectors to have input into their curriculum, inspect the quality of their graduating examination, and allow their instructors to undergo a short course. But they're not actually testers or driving examiners in the sense of being government agents.

The government will reserve the right to test graduates if it sees fit, and to withdraw at any time the accreditation of any school that fails to meet the standards. So they'll not be in business as official testers or for issuing licences. The schools will also be overseen by the safety branch of the Department of Transportation. MRS. CHICHAK: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Could the hon. minister advise whether his department has issued a correction to the information that had previously gone to the schools which was, in fact, wrong? MR. FARRAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker. University Fees DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to address my question to the Minister of Advanced Education. In light of the minister's announcement yesterday about the two levels of tuition fees, will the minister indicate if the new fee

schedule will in any way result in a reduction of provincial grants to Alberta universities? DR. HOHOL: I 'd just like to make two comments, Mr. Speaker. First, I did not make an announcement. I responded to a question on the floor of the House during the question period. I think that's significant. The second is: no, sir, there' II be no resulting change in the grant structure as a result of the two-fee structure. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, I guess the minister forgot he hadn't made that announcement before. Mr.

Speaker, my supplementary question is: in light of the fact that many foreign students, I' m sure, have already received notification they will be accepted at the old fee level, will there be any problems for the universities? DR. HOHOL: Mr Speaker, in large measure this will be internal to the university. I recall speaking directly on this very matter last week — on Thursday, if I recall. We reflected the hope that the university might be able to deal with this matter effectively this fall. However, that's what we' re doing, we' re hoping they might.

Should that prove to be impossible, difficult, unreasonable, or whatever, I made mention yesterday that without any question — if not before, then certainly by the fall term of 1977. DR. BUCK: Mr Speaker, to the hon. minister: will the two levels of tuition rates apply to landed immigrants or just to foreign students? DR. HOHOL: There is a great deal of work to be done on this matter, Mr Speaker. The only determination I've made and want to be clear on is that there will be two sets of fees.

The matter of definition of the foreign student, the amount of difference between the two sets of fees, and a whole host of other important aspects will be dealt with amongst the senior officials of universities and the government. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the last supplementary on this question. DR. BUCK: You mean the minister says that he did not look at these things before he made his decision. DR. HOHOL: It sounds like a rhetorical question, Mr Speaker, but I should like to point out that obviously I looked at all kinds of matters before the determina­ tion was made.

But make the principle decision first — the "le" principle decision — then make the other decisions later. Dam Standards MR. KUSHNER: Mr Speaker, I wish to direct my question to the Minister of the Environment. A dam has been built in the Elks' golf field in northeast Calgary. One of my constituents has inquired wheth­ er it meets the standards of the Department of the Environment. I wonder if the minister is in a position to inform this House if the department has been investigating whether it meets the standards MR.

RUSSELL: Mr Speaker, I' m not in a position to answer that question today, but I' II be glad to check

890 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976 with department officials and report to the hon. member. First Ministers' Conference MR. COOKSON: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask a question of the hon. the Premier. In view of the first ministers' conference being held this summer, and the position the Ontario premier has taken that he felt the meeting should be open to the public, I'm wondering whether the Premier could advise if he has had a dialogue with the Prime Minister on this issue, and whether or not it will be open to the public. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, as far as the Alberta government is concerned, we feel that most meetings involving first ministers should be open. The only possible exception is when there is some possibility of a negotiation such as the negotiation with regard to energy prices that occurred in March 1974. At the request of the Prime Minister, the first ministers' meeting two weeks from now will not be an open meeting. The Premier of Ontario, as the Member for Lacombe points out, has asked that it and the subsequent first ministers' meeting in June be open. We have no objection to either meeting being open.

Frankly, as I've said before in the House, we don't anticipate that the meeting next week to discuss energy prices is going to lead to any sort of agreement. If the meeting were open it might possib­ ly lead to a slight improvement in the awareness by other Canadians of the Alberta point of view. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary to the hon. Premier. When the Prime Minister of Canada has an open meeting, is it regular policy for him to close it by having a long, long banquet that evening? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, we haven't had the benefit of the long, long banquet, but we've certainly had the benefit of a long, long lunch to close a meeting. MR. COOKSON: Mr. Speaker, if the meetings are held in camera, will there be reasonably full public disclosure of what goes on? I think it's important. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I might reiterate that it's our preference that they be open meetings except in very unusual cases.

If it is a closed meeting, as has been requested by the Prime Minister in both May, on energy pricing, and June, on fiscal arrange­ ments, the understanding we've reached among first ministers is that after the meeting an individual first minister is free to take a public position on what he expressed during the course of the discussion, but not in any way to quote or attribute comments to any other first minister. I think that's probably the only fair and reasonable way to handle it. French Instruction MR. JAMISON: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Education.

Before I do that, I would like to ask the Speaker if he made a mistake on the two saints, St. Paul and St. Albert. There's 20,000 difference in population between those two centres. But my question is to the Minister of Education, Mr. Speaker. I've been reading the fifth annual report of the Commissioner of Official Languages. Recently, in the town of St. Albert, a group of parents who will be having children going to early childhood services next year were requesting from one of the boards if it would be possible to have a total immersion course in French.

A report here points out the pros and cons of teaching civil servants at the age of 40 how to speak French. They find it's almost impossible. Back in the 1950s, I noticed the University of Alberta employed an educator to look at . . . SOME HON. MEMBERS: Question, question. MR. SPEAKER: It appears to the Chair that the lengthy

preamble is coming from St. Albert rather than St. Paul. MR. JAMISON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My ques­ tion then to the Minister of Education: I was wondering if the minister would be prepared to make representation to the federal government — no str­ ings attached, as I realize the province has jurisdic­ tion over education — if some of the funding that went into the B. and B. could go into early childhood services for total immersion courses in French. MR. KOZIAK: Mr.

Speaker, I should point out that the Department of Education now does receive and dis­ tribute funds from the federal government to those school boards which provide for instruction in the French language and instruction of the French lan­ guage according to set formulas. A number of school boards take advantage of and receive these funds which we direct to them after we receive them from the federal government. Of course, school boards that take advantage of these procedures receive these funds.

In terms of the early childhood services experience, the hon. member is aware that this is not as structured a course as appears in our Grade 1 to Grade 12 curriculum. There's a great deal of freedom in early childhood services. As a matter of fact, there is the freedom for parents to develop a community- based kindergarten or early childhood services pro­ gram for their children if they wish to do so, and to use a language of instruction other than English. VS Services Contract MR. CLARK: My question is to the Premier.

I'd like to ask if he's in a position to indicate to the Assembly whether the contract with VS Services has been signed. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I'm sorry I have not had an opportunity to follow through on the request that I determine that from the minister in Ottawa and have the acting minister respond. We'll try to get an answer tomorrow, even if the answer is negative. MR. CLARK: We hope it is. Gun Control MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Solicitor General. With reference to gun con­

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 891 trol, I note there is provision for a local registrar of firearms who will do the licensing. Will the Solicitor General be appointing the local registrars? MR. FARRAN: Mr. Speaker, under the existing Criminal Code, the local registrars for restricted weapons are appointed by the province. They are usually policemen in the police forces for particular areas. The RCMP registrar is in Edmonton. Calgary, Edmonton, and Lethbridge would have their chiefs of police or their designates as local registrars.

Under the new proposal for the licensing of owners of shotguns and rifles, the province has asked federal authorities whether this function can be carried out by some body other than the police forces, other than local registrars of restricted weapons, such as the wildlife officers, or perhaps recognized authorities who presently can sell hunting licences. We have not yet had a reply to this letter from the Hon. Warren Allmand. Civil Servants as Witnesses MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct this question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture.

It's a follow-up to a question I asked several weeks ago concerning a court case and the testimony of several Department of Agriculture officials. Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister is: has the minister had an opportunity to determine whether Dr. John Taylor spent four days in court but testified for only one? MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, no. I've not inquired into that matter since, but I will. MR. SPEAKER: I would respectfully suggest to the hon. member that information would undoubtedly be available from the clerk of the court. AN HON. MEMBER: Agreed. Government Files as Evidence MR.

NOTLEY: A supplementary question. It is, that's why I raised it. But Mr. Speaker, I'd like to . . . [interjections] I would advise them. The supplementary question I would like to ask the hon. minister is: in view of the fact that information contained in government files was entered in testi­ mony during the trial without a specific court order, what is the policy of the government, particularly the Department of Agriculture, with respect to informa­ tion contained in government files being disclosed without a specific court order to do so? MR. MOORE: Mr.

Speaker, we're referring to the total amount of payments made to individuals under the livestock disaster indemnity program. I believe I indicated in the Legislature some two or three weeks ago, when this subject was under discussion, that the total amount of those individual payments and the name of the individual receiving them is a matter of public record. Certainly, they can be, and very often are, listed in the public accounts of the province under individual payments. They can be asked for by a Member of the Legislative Assembly. Mr.

Speaker, I wouldn't hesitate to make available on an individual basis to the Legislature, if it's necessary, the total amount of the payment and the name of the individual receiving it from the livestock disaster indemnity program for the length of time it's in operation, or for any fiscal year. Civil Servants as Consultants MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion to the hon. minister, in light of the concern by one of the parties to this case that during the course of the trial when Dr. Taylor was not testifying he consulted the lawyer for Pacific Petroleums. My question, first of all, Mr.

Speaker, is: for this kind of consulting service, does an employee of the department have to obtain the consent of the minister or some appropriate department official? MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I'm not at all sure that the statements by the hon. Member for Spirit River- Fairview are correct. Indeed, if they follow the type of accusations made some two weeks ago, it could very well be that they're in error. Before responding to that, I would have to check the matter of the statement contained in the question. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion to the hon. minister.

Is there any overall policy with respect to officials of the department acting as consultants? MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, with regard to this particular case and the attendance of department officials in court, I would refer the hon. member to my statement of about two weeks ago in Hansard. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question for clarification. My question is: is there any policy with respect to consulting, apart from the actual testimony for which an official has been called upon during a court proceeding? MR. MOORE: Mr.

Speaker, once again, I think I fully explained the position of the department with respect to individuals who may be called upon in that regard. As I recall, very briefly, it was that any individual working in the Department of Agriculture could be subpoenaed to attend in court as an expert witness. In so doing, he is not docked any pay. In fact, if any expenses are incurred during the course of that particular exercise, the individual submits an expense account. At the same time, a bill is submitted to the party who required the individual's attendance, which [bill] is paid to the Provincial Treasurer.

No fees can be, or are, charged by the individual members of the department for whatever time they spend or whatever information they provide in that regard. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary question. What is the policy of the department with respect to billing other parties that request the

892 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976 appearance of a government official? Is it based on the salary, or is it a set fee? MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I know I explained that some two weeks ago, and I just finished explaining it. The situation is that the individual or company which requests the attendance of one of our employees is charged for expenses only. Our employees are not docked any pay. In fact, if they are subpoenaed to appear as witnesses, they attend on that basis. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker . . . MR. SPEAKER: We've run out of time for the question period.

Perhaps the hon. member could save that question till tomorrow. ORDERS OF THE DAY head: WRITTEN QUESTIONS 164. Mr. Kushner asked the government the following question: What, according to information presently in the possession of the government, is the estimated annual value of the agricultural production that would be lost if the Dodds-Round Hill coal project went ahead; what is the estimated annual value of the coal production; for how many years would it produce; and what annual royalties would accrue to the province? DR. WARRACK: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to move that Question 164 be made a motion for a return, and as such is agreeable. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. minister's acceptance of the question automatically makes it an order for a return, without the question being put to the Assembly. 165. Mr. Kushner asked the government the following question: When, according to government information present­ ly on hand, are the sour gas wells in northeast Calgary expected to become exhausted and the land become available for development? head: MOTIONS FOR RETURNS MR. FOSTER: Mr.

Speaker, I move that the following motions for returns stand and retain their places on the Order Paper: 130, 172, 175, and 176. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if Motion for a Return 172 might be withdrawn. It will be resubmitted. MR. SPEAKER: The motion hasn't been moved, I take it. It does not require leave to withdraw. With regard to the remaining motions, which by the motion of the hon. Acting Government House Leader are proposed to stand, does the Assembly agree with that motion? [Motion carried] 171. Mr.

Notley proposed the following motion to the Assembly: That an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing: (1) the number and percentage of foreign workers employed by Canadian Bechtel Ltd. at the Syncrude site, between January 1, 1976, and April 1, 1976; (2) the number and percentage of foreign workers employed by Canadian Bechtel Ltd. at the Syncrude site in a capacity of supervision of smaller units of employees who do a particular job on the project, between January 1, 1976, and April 1, 1976. [Motion carried] 173. Mr.

Mandeville proposed the following motion to the Assembly: That an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing: (1) the name of each legal firm engaged by the Alberta Housing Corporation during the fiscal years 1974-75 and 1975-76, including the name of the specific lawyer or lawyers dealt with in each case; (2) the nature of the service supplied by each legal firm referred to in (1), including the amount of the fee charged for each such service. [Motion carried] 174. Dr.

Buck proposed the following motion to the Assembly: That an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing: (1) the name of each legal firm engaged by the Alberta Opportunity Company during the fiscal years 1974-75 and 1975-76, including the name of the specific lawyer or lawyers dealt with in each case; (2) the nature of the service supplied by each legal firm referred to in (1), including the amount of the fee charged for each such service. [Motion carried] 177. Mr.

Clark proposed the following motion to the Assembly: That an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing: All rented space in the city of Edmonton by provincial government departments, boards, and agencies as at April 1, 1976, giving in each case (

a) the location and amount of space being rented, (

b) the rate of rent being paid, (

c) the name of the landlord, (

d) the name of the occupant. [Motion carried] 178. Mr. Clark proposed the following motion to the Assembly: That an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing: All rented space in the city of Calgary by provincial

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 893 government departments, boards, and agencies as at April 1, 1976, giving in each case (

a) the location and amount of space being rented, (

b) the rate of rent being paid, (

c) the name of the landlord, (

d) the name of the occupant. [Motion carried] [Mr. Speaker left the Chair] head: GOVERNMENT DESIGNATED BUSINESS (Committee of Supply) [Dr. McCrimmon in the Chair] MR. CHAIRMAN: The Committee of Supply will now come to order. Department of Business Development and Tourism Vote 2 MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, under Vote 2, it would seem to me that this is an opportunity for us to raise a number of questions about the petrochemical industry, and I would ask the minister to respond. First of all I would like to know just what the reasons were for the decision by Du Pont not to proceed. Perhaps, Mr.

Chairman, rather than me giving a speech and then the minister answering some of the questions, we might just go question by question. MR. DOWLING: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I'd be willing to respond right now. The situation with Du Pont, as with CIL, is just this. With regard to the initial proposal for what we choose to call Petrochemical Project A, some six companies at a minimum had indicated some interest in becoming involved. They were Dow, Dome, Alberta Gas Ethylene, Alberta Gas Trunk Line, plus Du Pont and CIL.

During my involvement with Petrochemical Project A, a number of negotiation meetings and discussions of various types took place. As these meetings progressed, it became evident that at this time neither Du Pont nor CIL would be prepared to move to become involved in this initial stage, primarily because of the market situation, the availability of the product they were proposing to produce, and other things like financing and one thing or another. However, that did not really mean that Petrochem­ ical Project A would not advance.

It simply meant that one of the building blocks of the entire project would not go into place at that time. Last August or September, although they indicated strongly that they could not proceed now, Du Pont did throw out the year 1981 as a possible time to become involved. CIL also indicated that downstream, in several years' time, they would probably be changing their position. The principal of CIL that we were dealing with at that time has now been transferred to London, England, to take on a major position with ICI, which is the parent organization.

Just before leaving he came into my office, indicating again that because they weren't involved they hoped in time to be a part of the building block petrochemical industry advancement. You should know, too, that CIL is presently involved in a substantial way in Alberta. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, to follow that along a little bit, the minister mentioned two things, financing and markets. Let's just take a look at financing for a second or two.

Was it part of the bargaining by Du Pont that the Government of Alberta take out some equity or some form of additional cushioning in order for that projected project to proceed? MR. DOWLING: When I talked about financing, they felt that the problem with the product ethylene, even though it would be sold on a cost-of-service basis, was that cost at that moment did not reflect a profitable price at the market place. MR. NOTLEY: Were there any suggestions by Du Pont that the province of Alberta should in some way intervene, either by cushioning the price of ethylene or some other procedure? MR.

DOWLING: Those were never considered at all, if you're talking about subsidy. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to proceed on the question of markets. This is one of the areas that trouble a number of people in the province, especially with the announcement by Du Pont that they are going to wait until 1981. I'd like to ask the minister: what is the depart­ ment's assessment of the market potential? Has the Department of Business Development and Tourism undertaken an independent assessment of the gener­ al market area that Du Pont would have moved into? MR. DOWLING: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, the department and other departments did try to assess what Du Pont and other companies have been saying all along. Since they know their favorable market conditions better than we do, we had to accept what they said as being factual. There was no way we were in a position to push them into becoming involved. We do know, however, that Du Pont, CIL, and a number of other companies are interested in becoming involved in a further phase of the petrochemical industry. As for analyzing their analysis, we didn't undertake that at all. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Chairman, just to follow up for a moment on the question of general markets, I wonder perhaps if the minister would give the committee a breakdown of both the potentials and the problems of the world-scale petrochemical industry in Alberta.

I'm not talking about the CIL plant adjacent to Edmonton, but the whole question of the feasibility of a world-scale petrochemical industry specifically as it relates to two areas of concern: one, the obvious competition of Petrosar, which has been discussed in this House before; the other, the longer term impact of the Arab countries moving into the petrochemical field in a big way.

It seems to me that if you're looking at $50 or $60 billion a year of petrodollars that these countries receive, one of the obvious areas of investment would be a world petrochemical industry of a scale so immense that it would seem to me to pose some real

894 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976 challenges right here in western Canada. It seems to me we're contemplating really getting into the big leagues when we're talking about the vast sums of petrodollars. Five or ten years ago, it might have been a different matter. I'm wondering to what extent the department has assessed the moves now by the Arab countries, and what our problems are in relation to their development. MR. DOWLING: Mr.

Chairman, we've always indi­ cated to the proposed participants in the petrochem­ ical industry that in Alberta we do have a stable government; the lowest provincial tax and the lowest corporate tax; subsidies of one kind or another — educational, medical, and so on; no sales tax; and so on. These are all pluses in terms of establishing here. A major company like Dow moving into the Arab field is moving into an area that is questionable. The stability of the government, the chance of a change in government — this kind of thing could happen at any time.

We're also aware that in Iran, for example, a petrochemical industry is under way. Our preliminary examination of what they're doing in Iran — I think it's Iran or Iraq, it's one of the two that is doing something — [shows] their petrochemical industry is something like a fifth to a quarter the size of that being planned for Alberta, in terms of ethane extrac­ tion, ethylene, manufacture of vinyl chloride monom­ er, these kinds of things. So we consider our plant as world scale. In relation to our petrochemical industry, we do not consider the Iraq or Iran development of that scale.

The develop­ ment in Alberta will satisfy the western Canadian need. We hope it will eventually satisfy the Pacific northwest need — the United States, of course — and other areas throughout the world. It's a delicate thing. A half cent per pound of ethylene, a penny per pound of ethylene — it's amazing, but it's the criteri­ on for the thing proceeding. It's not the $1.5 billion that's the criterion; it's whether that 1 cent per pound of ethylene makes the whole project viable. As I've indicated earlier, Petrosar was a real devastating blow to the former Minister of Industry and Commerce, Mr.

Peacock, who worked very dili­ gently and hard to pull the petrochemical package together during the four years he was responsible for that ministry. Its establishment obviously meant that some of the product manufactured by Petrosar in Sarnia would put us a bit behind. However, we're confident that with the routes we are taking, we will have a value added to our natural gas and petroleum streams, which are now actually moving out of Alberta without too much value added. They are going out in crude form. I would suggest that with a great deal of luck in the market place, we will manage to be fairly successful.

I should just tell you what Petrochemical Project A involves as we see it at the moment. It involves the possibility of three straddle plants: one at Empress, one at Cochrane, and one just outside Edmonton. I can give you the names of those. They are in the documents we tabled already. It involves a collection network to bring the ethane to Joffre, just outside Red Deer, and from that, the manufacture of ethy­ lene. The ethylene will be transported from there to the Fort Saskatchewan area, where it will be upgraded to VCM, ethylene glycol, ethanolamine, and other derivatives.

One further one, polyvinyl chloride, will be manufactured by Diamond Shamrock. It's a recent arrival, and is in the process of negotiating a position with the supplier of vinyl chloride monomer. That, basically, is a thumbnail sketch. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the minis­ ter's review of the world-scale petrochemical industry as the government envisages it. I'm interested, though, in going back to two things. The potential competition from the Middle East — the minister talked about a plant in Iraq or Iran. Surely the Arab countries are making more of an effort than just one or two plants.

I'm wondering to what extent the department has analyzed developments in the Middle East. Through the Petroleum Marketing Commission, or in consultation with the federal Department of Trade and Commerce, have we any ongoing monitoring of the moves? The Arab countries have this huge amount of petrodollars. If we're going to be looking at diversify­ ing our economy in a petrochemical industry, one of the areas that makes sense in Alberta because of our feedstock, it would seem to me the same argument is just as obvious to the Arab countries.

Whether they have plants under way now, it would seem to me that is one of the areas of diversification of their economies, where we're going to see considerable investment of those huge amounts of money in the future. MR. DOWLING: Mr. Chairman, the Middle East petrochemical plant is less than world scale. In a situation like that, they put the initial plant in and everything that follows is only according to that initial scale. On our extraction facility, for example, the initial documents indicated 110,000 barrels per day.

Sometimes I get a little confused on numbers, so if Hansard reads it and it says barrels when it should say pounds, I hope they'll correct it. But it's barrels per day of ethane that are being extracted. On the basis of that, we have enough ethane to establish not only one ethylene plant, but a second. You will recall the documents mentioned a second [ago], and perhaps additional ethylene plants down the way. We have always held the view that if we're to be in the petrochemical industry, we're to be in it on a world scale, or it will strictly be a domestic kind of scene. By domestic, I mean western Canada.

Our market is so obviously the Pacific northwest, where they have some 28 million people, and our western provinces as well. I have no doubt there will be derivatives if, as I say, we become successful, or the next minister or whoever has responsibility for it down the road is successful. Other branches of the petrochemical industry will be established, which will bring into Alberta a great deal of product not now manufactured in Canada, or maybe even in the western world. It has tremendous potential. We've always held the view that we must do everything we can to upgrade our resources so far as is possible.

This is a first step. At the moment, the ethane is just escaping down the pipeline with no chance of recovery. It's gone, and gone forever. We feel we must capitalize on that extraction of ethylene as a first step in the building- block effort. The second step is the pipeline to bring it

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 895 to Joffre. The third step is ethylene. The fourth step is VCM, and so on. We consider each of those as a little building block for what could be a massive industry. The other thing I'm sure the hon. member may be alluding to is, where do we propose to put them, and why? What are the negative aspects of it? I can see only one, and that is in the planning. All we can do as government is say, we think at this time it's reasonably right to move ahead with extraction plants, gathering systems, pipelines for ethylene, manufacture of ethylene first of all, VCM.

That adds a considerable amount of construction during a period when the Syncrude organization is peaking, or has peaked, and the construction phase is on its way down. That is why, in the letter of understanding from the companies, there was an indication of a particular start-up date for some of the things that were going to take place. We would like to see that come on stream at a particular time, so there is not this massive up and down of labor availability.

That is how we hope to have our input into the planning of it, so there aren't any pressures on our economy which could cause massive immigration of construction workers or people like that. It gives us time to upgrade our skills in Alberta, so Albertans will partic­ ipate in those high-quality jobs that are going to be offered. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, the minister mentioned the potential for markets in the Pacific northwest. What specific initiatives have been taken with respect to the tariff problem?

On a number of occasions, the Premier has alluded to the difficulties with tariffs on certain types of petrochemicals to get into the American market. It was one of the subjects dis­ cussed at the Western Economic Conference in Calgary in 1973. I wonder if the minister would like to bring us up to date on whether any progress has been made on that matter since 1973, and what impediments still exist as a result of the present tariff structure. MR. DOWLING: Very briefly, Mr. Chairman, I can give you my personal views on what we would like to see happen.

We would never like to see petrochemi­ cals established to the detriment of the agricultural industry, which is so well established in western Canada, particularly in Alberta. However, we would like freer trade in petrochemicals, because it's a new diversification attempt in Alberta. Obviously on that basis we would like freer trade in petrochemicals. Beyond that, some initiatives have been taken. Dis­ cussions have been going on with those people who are very much interested.

Our GATT position reflects that view, the position we made some time ago to the federal authority on General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. We are hoping that when they make their presentation in Geneva our position is reflected effectively. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I could just take a moment or two to run through the basis of the petrochemical industry in Alberta. In the process I'd like to raise some questions to the minister.

As I understand the project in Red Deer at this stage of the game, we begin with 110,000 barrels of ethane per day, and that is the equivalent of about 63 billion cubic feet of natural gas. That's correct if I'm not mistaken. Motion for a Return No. 118 in 1974 dealt with the potential ethane availability in Alberta. The minister obviously doesn't have this document in front of him, but in 1976 the total amount of ethane extraction potential in the province is 109,430 barrels per day. We're looking at the Red Deer complex proceeding with 110,000 barrels a day; in other words, the entire amount.

The obvious question to be asked, Mr. Minister, is: through the Red Deer program, are we not allowing one consortium to tie up the petrochemical business as it relates to ethane extraction in Alberta? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, no, that's not correct. If the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview will reflect on the letter sent through me to the depart­ ment on September 17, Dome and PanCanadian were proposing to extract some 30,000 barrels per day at Empress; Pacific Petroleums, 33,000 at Empress; Alberta Natural Gas Company, 27,000 at Cochrane; and Dome Canadian Utilities, 20,000 in the Edmon­ ton area.

That makes up the 110,000. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, as I understand it all these other firms are tied in to the Red Deer complex. Is it not true that the basis of the Red Deer complex is 110,000 barrels of ethane a day? Of that 110,000 barrels of ethane a day, 30,000 barrels will be used by Alberta Gas Ethylene in Red Deer, which will produce 1.2 billion pounds of ethylene per year. Now the other 80,000 barrels of ethane per day will be exported to the United States. Not to raise that question at this stage, the point I'm making is the profits made from the export of the 80,000 barrels to the United States.

As I understand the Premier's announcement, 30 per cent of those profits will be used to cushion the Alberta Gas Ethylene plant in Red Deer. Is that not correct? That was my clear understanding of the Premier's announcement. The point I'm making, then, is that in fact we have a tying-in of the Alberta Gas Ethylene plant with the ethane producers who are part of this particular consortium, because 30 per cent of the profits made from the export of ethane to the United States must come back to Alberta Gas Ethylene in Red Deer. MR.

DOWLING: The cost of ethylene is reflected on a cost-of-service basis, and that cost will be passed on. I'm not sure if that's what you mean. However, you must also understand that there is room in that for additional ethylene plants. That 110,000 barrels per day can be used for any number of ethylene plants. So it could be recalled. It depends on how successful that first venture is. At least it's a venture which has to be some considerable plus. It has not been done before, and if we don't do it, it just goes down the pipe. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, I'm not arguing that point.

The point I'm arguing is that as I understand the agreement — correct me if I'm wrong — 110,000 barrels of ethane a day are produced. Thirty thou­ sand barrels a day are used by Alberta Gas Ethylene in Red Deer to manufacture 1.2 billion pounds of ethylene per year. We have 80,000 barrels a day left for export. Okay. Now the question is: to what extent are we obliged

896 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976 to honor that export commitment? What flexibility do we have? Perhaps the Provincial Treasurer would like to answer this. What flexibility do we have on that 80,000 barrels per day exported to the United States? Can we cut it down next year to 50,000 barrels per day; the year after that to 25,000 barrels? Or are we locked in to that 80,000 barrels per day to the U.S. market as a long-term export? MR. DOWLING: No. It's recallable at any time. MR.

NOTLEY: I realize that a certain amount of this is the result of nose-to-nose discussions with the prin­ cipals involved, but are you in any position today to advise the committee as to what steps we're likely to see taking place, and the time period? Is it in fact feasible that within a couple of years we could have another ethylene plant, or are we looking at 10 years? My understanding of the agreement is that there's no commitment on the part of anybody to build a second ethylene plant. MR. DOWLING: That's a difficult question to answer, Mr. Chairman.

I wouldn't be about to say when a second ethylene plant would be started. That also would depend on market conditions and so on, and whether other companies would then come in to manufacture such things as I've already mentioned, perhaps low-density and high-density polyethylene and so on. I just received a note from the Provincial Treasurer which verifies my earlier statement. In accordance with the letter of September 17, it is recallable. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask either minister where we stand in terms of shrinkage. I understand there is a marginal shrinkage when we use the ethane.

I don't know what that is; I'm no expert in this field at all. But if we have long-term gas contracts for export, how do we meet this problem of the shrinkage as a result of the upgrading of the ethane — the ethylene extraction and ultimate­ ly along the chain? Of the 63 billion cubic feet a year, how much shrinkage takes place? How do we deal with that shrinkage? Do we make more natural gas available from our reserves for the export contracts we've already made, or how is that handled? MR. DOWLING: Mr.

Chairman, that's strictly a matter for negotiation between the company taking the ethane and the company providing the natural gas stream for the removal of that ethane. As I understand it, those negotiations are proceeding rather effectively as of today. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, just to clarify that. Surely it's not just a question of negotiation between the companies. If we have to make more natural gas available to overcome shrinkage, surely that would have to be authorized by the Energy Resources Conservation Board and, I would also expect, the National Energy Board.

It would seem to me that if more natural gas, even if it's just 5 or 6 billion cubic feet a year — I don't know what the percentage of shrinkage is; perhaps the minister could advise the committee of that — but whatever figure it is, it would seem to me that it would not just be subject to the negotiation between companies, but to the authorization of both the appropriate provincial authority — the ERCB — and the National Energy Board. MR. DOWLING: Mr.

Chairman, if I might quote from page 3 of the September 17 letter to the department from the various companies, the second paragraph says: Dow and Dome undertake to sell at the market prices prevailing at the time of such sale the volumes of natural gas that are necessary to provide to TransCanada PipeLines Limited the BTU's removed below 1,000 BTU/Cubic Foot at Empress as a result of the ethane extraction referred to above. Which means they must put back the BTUs up to 1,000 BTUs. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, that's precisely the point I'm raising. Surely that would be subject to the National Energy Board.

What I would like to know is: how much natural gas are we going to have to make available from fields in Alberta — it matters not what company is producing it — to make up the shrinkage? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Chairman, on page 8 the letter says: All of the undertakings given herein by the various companies are subject to the conditions that the Companies are able to make the necessary financial arrangements to proceed with the proposed project and are able to obtain the necessary regulatory approvals. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, that answers the ques­ tion as far as the ERCB is concerned.

I assume they must go through the ERCB and the National Energy Board. The minister is shaking his head, but I would like him to confirm whether that's a correct assumption. The second part of the question is: if that's true, what are we looking at in terms of more natural gas to make up that shrinkage? That's just a factual question. I would like to know if we're looking at 5 billion cubic feet or 2 billion cubic feet. I'd just like to know what the shrinkage will be. MR. DOWLING: Mr. Chairman, we have under examination through the ERCB that very figure as it relates to one of the extraction plants.

My under­ standing, just in a global way, is that it is not a large amount. I will certainly make that figure public, either during the study of my estimates or in question period or at some other time, if you wish. But I haven't that figure at hand at the moment. Perhaps the Provincial Treasurer can respond if he wishes, but I think he's in a similar situation. MR. DONNELLY: Mr. Chairman, I have two complete­ ly unrelated questions for the minister. First, regard­ ing the Alberta Export Agency in the London oil show. The first question is: does the minister plan to participate in the London oil show?

Secondly, how many Alberta companies at this point are planning to participate? My second question is on tourism. I might as well give them both to you at the same time, Mr. Minister,

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 897 and you can answer them. Are there any plans for more highway campsites, which are so badly needed? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Chairman, on the first one, last year the marketing division of the Department of Business Development and Tourism was responsible for our government's participation in the Aberdeen offshore oil '75 show, a very successful show even from the standpoint of the participants at that show at that very time. My understanding is that something in the order of $80,000 worth of business was written in the first day or so.

There were 13 companies participating in that show last year. This coming year "the" offshore show to participate in is the London offshore show, and we do intend to participate. We would hope that the private sector participants who accompanied us last year will again accompany us this year, and there could be additional ones. Some of those who were invited to participate last year did not do so. Most of them did. Some were a little sceptical of the value of the show. They came back, and if one thing happened over the last fiscal year that was positive in nature, it was the offshore '75 show.

A great number of letters were received from participants indicating they thought it was an excellent thing for us to sponsor and to assist the private sector in becoming involved. Our involvement was to supply tourist transporta­ tion for some of the participants and to assist them in shipping some of their material. I think the total cost was in the area of $40,000. I can't just recall the exact figure; that I can provide for you later on.

On tourism and highway campsites, I understand the Minister of Transportation, who has some consid­ erable responsibility for their development, is plan­ ning some additional ones, bearing in mind budgetary restraints. This year they will not be as extensive as I'm sure all hon. members would like them to be. Our view is that in many cases the responsibility for campsites, highway and otherwise, for some of them at least, will be transferred to the Department of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife, where I think they properly belong.

On the matter of campsites, through Travel Alberta we undertook last year a study by Synergy West to determine what conflict there really was between the private sector operator and the government-operated campsite. We closed two campsites in order that we might determine or assist the company, Synergy West, to determine for us the things we wanted. The two we chose either were in my constituency in 1971 or would have been had there not been redistribution.

It caused me considerable concern when I received upwards of 800 letters as a result of the closure of those two campsites with a sign indicating "No Overnight Camping". Our preliminary advertising was perhaps not as extensive as it might have been, but it did indicate to us a number of things. One was that a great number of the people using those campsites were overnight campers on their way to B.C. or other areas and were just there overnight.

It indicated to us that in some instances there is a conflict between a campground system which I think is a real plus for Alberta — not instituted by this government, but a real plus, three hundred and some campsites — but it indicated that we should be upgrading some of our government- operated ones so that the private sector operators out there do have a better chance to survive. As I understand the situation, as a result of our most recent report, 21 private operators in the campground field are competing in an area where we have three hundred and some government-operated campsites.

But our view is to continue a study that's under way between Recreation, Parks and Wildlife, Transportation, and this department through Travel Alberta, to determine exactly where we should move in changing the rules, upgrading government camp­ sites, that kind of thing. MR. DONNELLY: Mr. Chairman, just one other ques­ tion. Going back to the offshore show in London, does the minister himself plan to attend? MR. DOWLING: I would love to attend because of Alberta's potential for greater development in off­ shore. This is our initial foray.

We've had the Aberdeen show, the show in Stevenage prior to that in a minimal way, then this one. We found it so successful that we're looking to other offshore shows, one in Singapore which is as great as the London one or greater. I'm not sure my time will permit. If I could guarantee that my presence would mean something significant to the private sector, I wouldn't have any hesitation. But I'm not particularly interested in going on a trip to London just to see London. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to ask the minister one or two things.

First of all, I did my best to get the present minister a full-time portfolio. But it didn't seem to do too much good, because he didn't get the portfolio in the area I wanted him to. That is to do with tourism, Mr. Chairman. It's an industry that's in the vicinity of almost $.5 billion per year. MR. DOWLING: More. DR. BUCK: More? The minister says more. It's jumped a little since '72 or '73. It was about $385 million at that time. But, Mr. Chairman, I think it's just about time this government, and the former government long before it, should have had a full- time minister of tourism. Now, Mr.

Chairman, I'm not saying we should increase the size of the cabinet, but I'm saying we should give the hon. Mr. Dallas Schmidt or the hon. Mr. McCrae something to do for the $30,000 a year they're getting from the tax­ payers. So I would like to see either one of these two ministers given the responsibility of the ministry of tourism, because we have many departments with a tenth of the budget that have full-time ministers. So I would just like to have the minister indicate to the Legislature why this government hasn't moved into a full-time ministry of tourism. That will be a good start. MR. DOWLING: Well, Mr.

Chairman, we have. I appreciate the hon. member's comments. If he was of some assistance in my receiving a full portfolio, I also offer him my thanks with gratitude and zeal. I can tell him, however, that in 1974 Alberta realized some $528 million in direct revenue as a result of tourist trade in Alberta. That is a measure of the direct revenue from hotel patronage. We take off a percentage of that because it's not directly related

898 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976 to tourism The direct revenue in the 1975 calendar year was $618 million, a rise of some 16.7 per cent in one calendar year. I think it's a positive step, and I would just like to briefly say what I think have been the positive steps that have been taken by Travel Alberta as a tourist entity for the government. First of all, as all members who were here earlier will recall, when the branch started the original budget was rather minimal.

I felt that if we were to move ahead successfully, we should engage some people from the private sector who knew the industry far better than anybody in government. That is to say nothing detrimental about government. I should say right now that I have what I consider the best and most effective staff of all branches of any department of government. However, back to tourism.

We recruited four people who I felt were really important: one was the executive director — a position which was then open — from the private sector, a second from the private sector came from the city of Edmonton to handle a marketing branch, a third came from another branch of government to handle the distribution network, and a fourth also came from the private sector to handle the planning. With those four people, we managed to get the thing off the ground, and with an executive director level I think those fellows operated extremely effec­ tively. They caused me no problems.

They knew what they were doing, and they did it relying further on the private sector. They established 14 zones throughout Alberta. These zones were given some financial assistance to get operating, then cost- shared financial assistance to develop their own tourist program. Since the Department of Business Development and Tourism was formed, I think we have had a further upgrading by elevating the executive director position to assistant deputy minister, which really gives us a two-armed department, one being busi­ ness development, the other one tourism. I feel it's a move in the right direction.

I am very concerned about tourism. I believe it's an industry that can contribute a massive amount to our economy. But I also think it can be killed so very easily. I am very sensitive about anybody telling me, well, why don't you promote this area? Why don't you do that, and why don't you do this? I say, for goodness' sake, let's take it slow. Let's do it very effectively. Let's build an industry that's going to last. My view at the moment, and the branch's view, is that we must develop facilities next. Our next major goal is additional facilities.

I'm not just talking about an additional motel in Lacombe or most certainly not an additional hotel in Jasper, or anything like that. I'm talking about facilities of a major nature, some­ thing that will entice people from all over Canada to come here because there's a new destination area. One area it has always struck me that we have never really been able to capitalize on properly is the Drumheller area and the badlands. We have done considerable work in trying to work out some sort of plan which would give permanence to a tourist industry there.

The second [area] is the lake country, where we have a tremendous potential. But it could also be lost if we overpromote it. I can recall a neighboring province not too very many years ago decided they had what they thought was a major tourist industry. They thought the basis of that industry lay in hunting. For one year they advertised, come and hunt in this province. They had something like 50 times as many hunters as they had animals. So you can imagine what happened. Not too long ago, I had a vacation in one of the vacation spots of the world. It was a very short vacation, and it wasn't very many weeks ago.

While I was there, I decided to take some time to see the tourist officials to determine how they ran their operation and what they felt about mass transporta­ tion, like two 747s landing every day and disgorging something like 350 tourists from a particular area, how they handle things like that. I wasn't at all alarmed when I saw parties of 250 or more travelling along a street with a flag carrier at the front and one at the back. Those you'd see two or three times a day, if you wanted to stand on that same street corner.

In any case, the officials of this place said you could do two or three things if you want to promote tourism without constantly promoting it. But when you become a destination area, you have to be extremely careful that you don't allow the tourist who's visiting to take you over. First they'll own the facilities, next they'll own the manufacturing facilities, then they'll own the dining rooms, and then you'll lose it. I don't have a a discriminating bone in my body when it comes to people, races, religions, and things of that nature. But I also am very much aware that we are Canadians first, then Albertans.

I believe we have a fantastic potential in Alberta, better than the potential of any province in Canada Therefore we must be very careful we don't overpromote. Our promotional efforts are in certain very select areas. Just on a regional basis, we obviously promote in B.C., because we're in a net loss position with B.C. We promote in Saskatchewan and Manito­ ba. We put a great deal of store in promoting in Ontario, in central Canada. We promote in the Pacific northwest, which is our major foreign potential.

We promote in the Chicago-Minneapolis area, because it's our next major foreign potential and one we've had some considerable success with. Then, in order of priority, we promote in the United Kingdom, because something like 90 per cent of the visitors from the United Kingdom are what they call "vfr" visitors — visit friends and relations. They come back continually. They're back and forth all the time. The last area we promote in a major way is central Europe, Germany and those affluent countries that really have the money to spend. Also, we do not promote our hunting.

I mentioned the hunting that was promoted in a neighboring province. We do not promote hunting. We believe our hunting is available to Albertans. We don't tell foreigners they can't come in. They have an option to buy a licence like anyone else, but they pay a higher fee through the Department of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife. We do promote the guide and outfitter arrange­ ment.

We feel there's a great deal of potential in guiding and outfitting, but only when the guides and outfitters decide to get together and form a single- window concept of an organization, so we can deal with them as a single body and promote them

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 899 DR. BUCK: Why not a minister? AN HON. MEMBER: Agreed. MR. KIDD: We're not in balance. I understand that even with the United States, more people go to the United States than come from the United States into Alberta. It would seem to me that in your promotions — I think you've covered it — an area to promote would be for Albertans to explore Alberta and stay in Alberta. What is our net balance? MR. DOWLING: Our net balance is negative. In foreign travel with the United States, it's $20 million. You are absolutely correct that we should be promoting travel in Alberta by Albertans.

That's really what we have effectively done. We started it the year before last. We put on a major campaign last year, which was extremely successful. We have statistics to prove that. That will be continued. We do it between zones. We expect that Zone 1 in southern Alberta will be promoting Zone 14, which is in the Peace River country, and vice versa. It's amazing to attend a meeting in southern Alberta on tourism and say, how many people from here have ever been to Peace River? Just a smatter­ ing of people will hold up their hands. So we are doing that exactly, and I think that's a very important observation.

MR. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to get away from the tourist business and perhaps move to three or four other areas. I'd like to start by asking the minister if he could indicate to us the present status of Steel Alberta Limited. I relate to some comments made by his deputy minister in September, 1975, indicating that the province was moving in this direc­ tion, that they'd incorporated, they were waiting for some decisions, and the thing would be moving on from there. My question to the minister is: what's the status of Steel Alberta? What plans does the government have for the Steel Alberta complex this year?

MR. DOWLING: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I could have the Provincial Treasurer respond now. Is that what you wish, or shall I proceed? Right. Mr. Chairman, as you will recall, on December 14 of last year the actual documents were signed to provide for the establishment of Steel Alberta. You will recall the figures on that. I do have them here if you wish me to repeat them. However, since that time a board of directors has been appointed. That board of directors is now functioning with — I do have the title of the chap — in any case, an interim manager. The interim manager came to see me today.

I wanted to know what was happening to Steel Alber­ ta, as does the hon. Leader of the Opposition. I asked him what he or the board of directors was planning for the next little while. He said, we have followed up on every one of the steel manufacturers you sent to see us. When someone who has indicat­ ed interest in developing steel or becoming further involved in steel manufacture and fabrication in Alberta came to see me in the office, I would have a conversation with them, determine what they were doing and what they proposed to do.

Then I would promptly send them over to Steel Alberta and say, I hope you have a meeting with Mr. Dave Mitchell and the principals of Steel Alberta to see whether there is an opportunity for you to become involved in a joint venture with Steel Alberta in order that western Canada can be established as a centre for steel for the western provinces. This interim manager indicated to me they are now in the process of arranging formal meetings with every steel manufacturer they know of, in order to further promote this joint venture arrangement.

He also indicated that he would be visiting Montana, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia for several purposes, the first being to determine the present situation with regard to raw iron deposits. He indicated to me that two of the deposits in Saskatch­ ewan did not look too promising. He indicated that the deposit in Montana did hold some promise, but he wasn't sure of that. He indicated that the NKK organization undertook a major study in the province of British Columbia to determine whether a tide water steel entity could be developed there.

It appeared to him and perhaps to others that it may be pie in the sky thinking. They don't have a source of steel or raw ore in B.C. They would also be working with scrap. It looked like pie in the sky. I have no doubt that each of the steel organizations that has visited my office and asked me how it could become involved and that I've sent to Steel Alberta has been received very graciously. I believe there will be further follow-up. MR. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the minister would elaborate more. It's quite possible that I've missed something here.

Is the general manager — if that's the term you use — of Steel Alberta AEC's Dave Mitchell? Would the minister then elaborate for us where the money is now coming from for the operation of Steel Alberta? I recognize they're in the formative stages. But, really, where do we find the money that Steel Alberta is using for the various studies and work going on? I'd also like to ask the minister on this particular matter: what does the minister expect from Steel Alberta as far as next year is concerned? Is this going to be a year of discussions, a year of meetings?

Is it the government's intention that Steel Alberta will end up being a part of the Alberta Energy Company? Is that why Mr. Mitchell is the head man at Steel Alberta? If the minister could supply us with this, I'd also be interested in knowing the board of directors. Are they the same directors as the Alberta Energy Company? Specifically, what does the minister expect from Steel Alberta as far as this next year is concerned? Where is the money coming from to pay for the work being done by Steel Alberta? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Chairman, since Steel Alberta is a limited company, they have their sources of funds.

I would suspect they would be from AGTL and the Alberta Energy Company. There are eight members on the board of directors. I understand the names of them to be public. They are: Mr. Harry Irving, president of Irving Industries, Irving Steel Wire and so on; Mr. Kadlec, vice- president of AGTL; Mr. Pearce, executive vice- president of AGTL; Mr. Blair, president of Alberta Gas Trunk Line. They are the nominees from the

900 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976 Alberta Gas Trunk Line. From the Alberta Energy Company: Mr. Mitchell, the president; Mr. Orr, the vice-president of finance; Mr. Bill Walsh, the manager of administrative serv­ ices; and Mr. Lomas, a partner of Macleod Dickson, Barristers and Solicitors. I expect they will follow up on the priorities estab­ lished some time ago in buying the IPSCO shares in the eventual establishment of Steel Alberta.

First of all, it was recognized that we could not continue to be at the mercy of the suppliers, both off-shore and central Canada, because we were in a position where we were taking second best. At the moment we do have a surplus of steel. But if the forecasts that our department is able to put together are correct, in three years we could be in a position where we were a couple of years ago, a year and a half ago.

It's our hope that a major steel entity will be put together in conjunction with the various partners now in our shares of Steel Alberta: Alberta Gas Trunk Line, Alberta Energy Company, the Saskatchewan government, and Slater Steel. What we're really talking about is a western Canadian steel entity. I have no doubt that, with the kind of people on the board of Steel Alberta, Alberta interests will be most favorably looked after. MR. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, could I ask the minister: what's the assessment of Steel Alberta as far as the iron ore deposits in northwestern Alberta are concerned? MR.

DOWLING: It's very difficult, Mr. Chairman, to answer positively or negatively in that regard. When this department was first formed, a further study was undertaken by the Research Council which is still in progress. I have to say that it does not look as positive as I would like it to be. As a result of that, I've asked the department to look at alternatives that we might suggest to Steel Alberta, although I'm sure they're far more capable of doing that than I. I am concerned that there is a limited supply of scrap. Scrap price has risen in the last little while from $20 per ton to $80 per ton, or better.

The supply of scrap is so limited that we have to look for raw iron ore deposits. Brazil has always looked very interesting to me. I'm not sure how bringing supplies of iron ore from Brazil could be accomplished, but it's something I did discuss today with Mr. Walsh, who was over to see me. I did ask him if he could give me some idea about how off-shore supplies might be accomplished. Who does it? Does the coal mining company do it? Does the steel company do it? Does the government do it? How do we accommodate or develop a supply of raw iron ore for our steel entity in Alberta? MR.

CLARK: To follow along this question of off-­ shore. It would seem to me one of the possibilities that either the department or Steel Alberta would be looking at would be the possibility of the off-shore ore coming back in the automatic cars that go out with coal from the Grande Cache area. I'm not sure specifically. Has that been looked at? When one looks at the economics of the Mclntyre Porcupine venture, or of off-shore steel or iron ore coming to Alberta, if you can cut down the deadhead time as far as coal is concerned, that is certainly a plus.

If you can do it for off-shore steel, there are a number of advantages with the proximity of coal in, in fact, it has been the minister's constituency. Pretty candidly, has this been looked at? Where does this sit right now? What are the possibilities? MR. DOWLING: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we did look at it briefly. If I recall correctly — and if I'm not I'll make a point of correcting this statement — the type of cars they use for carrying coal from Mclntyre for example and from Luscar or wherever else are different from those they would require for carrying the raw steel.

That was an obvious early question about bringing steel from off-shore. I think the problem arises in how we barter for the iron-ore deposit in Brazil, if that's the one we choose. One of the most promising locations for getting to raw iron ore at the moment appears to be Montana. But I can give you no statistics on why I think it is. It just seems [so] to me, because of the depth of the deposit in Saskatchewan which varies from 4,500 feet in one location with over 4,500 feet of over­ burden to 1,500 feet in another case.

Judging on the basis of that and then the poor-quality ore that you'd get out, the Montana deposit does look a little more promising. There may be some possibility in that. MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I could ask the minister if Steel Alberta is now at a point in its development where they have qualified employees on their staff, or if these appointee directors are still handling the inquiries as they come in from serious steel people. MR. DOWLING: Mr. Chairman, I did ask that ques­ tion of Mr. Walsh today.

I said: is it your view that the present board of directors is fully enough schooled in steel and steel fabrication to handle the development of a major steel industry in western Canada? He said, if Steel Alberta is to become effective, it's our view that those people who are going to put that effective organization in place will be a consortium of companies, including Steel Alber­ ta and many other partners, most of whom would have some considerable expertise in the steel indus­ try. I must thank the hon. Member for Calgary Glenmore who brought that very matter to my atten­ tion some time ago. MR. PLANCHE: Mr.

Chairman, if I may, I was trying to determine whether the people who come through the minister's office and inquire from him as to the prospects of joint equity projects or some other type of financing that he is referring to that board are now answering and carrying on discussions with the appointees from Trunk and Alberta Gas Ethylene. Do they have a qualified, salaried man on hand to discuss with these possible applicants the various avenues that may be open to them? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Chairman, as I know it, the only people there are those people presently on the board of directors.

I know of no recent appointees. It would be an internal matter. From my standpoint, I'm only interested in the entity being established in a permanent way and being of some value. However, [of] those principals whom I've had an opportunity to discuss with most recently, Mr. Harry Irving, the

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 901 president of Irving Steel Products in Calgary, knows my view full well. It's a view similar to his. I'm very pleased to see him on there because he does happen to be someone who is familiar with the industry. MR. CHAIRMAN: Vote 2, 2.1. MR. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, is the Treasurer going to make some . . . MR. LEITCH: Mr. Chairman, not on this.

I was merely going to respond to the Leader of the Opposi­ tion's request earlier when these estimates were being considered by the committee with respect to the availability of the survey that the Department of Treasury has been doing on gasoline prices across Canada. I've checked into that and find that we are getting information from outside Alberta pursuant to arrangements with the companies. It's not a matter that we're entitled to get, as is the case in Alberta. We wouldn't be free to release that information from outside the province of Alberta without specifically getting the consent of the companies. MR.

CLARK: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the Provincial Treasurer: would he be prepared to con­ sult the companies to see if the information could be made public? I would see no reason it couldn't. Do you have information with regard to monitoring inside the province? MR. LEITCH: Not broken out. We'd have to prepare a separate document. I'm sure that could be done. With respect to checking with the companies, I'd be happy to do that. MR. CLARK: Mr.

Chairman, just to follow this up, the reason I asked is that the other evening — and this may be as good a time as any to raise the question — the minister quoted from Oilweek the average prices across Canada and so on. Checking with Oilweek, I find that those are figures which Oilweek got from Imperial Oil. I found it a bit strange that the government would be quoting figures from that area, as opposed to this information that supposedly was available in the Provincial Treasurer's department.

That's why I think it would be very helpful to us to be able to get the information, not only on a national basis, but also to break it out specifically within the province. MR. LEITCH: Mr. Chairman, at the moment I don't see any problem of breaking it out within the prov­ ince. I'll check on that. If we're able to do it, we'll provide that information. Of course the answer as to why we weren't quoting from our own surveys is contained in what I had earlier said. We were getting them by agreement with the companies and on a confidential basis and haven't asked them for their concurrence in releasing it.

We'll now make that request. MR. CHAIRMAN: Our time has expired. MR. DOWLING: Mr. Chairman, if I might just respond to a question asked earlier, it will just take a moment. So there's no confusion, the hon. Leader of the Opposition rather indicated that Mr. Dave Mit­ chell was the general manager of Steel Alberta. That is not correct. The board of directors is simply there. There are four members from each of the two companies. There's no general manager indicated. The president is Mr. Lomas, who is the appointee from the Alberta Energy Company. Executive vice- president is Mr. Kadlec, from AGTL.

The secretary is Mr. Arnie Larson, vice-president of AEC. I do have another document I'd like to quote from tonight. MR. CHAIRMAN: Our time has expired. MR. FOSTER: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee rise, report progress, and beg leave to sit again. [Motion carried] [Dr. McCrimmon left the Chair] [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] DR. McCRIMMON: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has had under consideration certain resolu­ tions, begs to report progress, and asks leave to sit again. MR. SPEAKER: Having heard the report and request for leave to sit again, do you all agree? HON.

MEMBERS: Agreed. head: MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, while I am not Mr. Appleby, I rise to inform the House that Mr. Appleby is unavoidably detained in returning from an obliga­ tion. I would ask the House's concurrence that Motion No. 1 stand and retain its place on the Order Paper, and that we move to Motion No. 2. MR. SPEAKER: Does the Assembly agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. 2. Moved by Mr. Taylor:

Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly of Alberta request the Government of Alberta to urge the Government of Canada to introduce legislation rein­ stating the death penalty for all persons convicted of murder. [Adjourned debate: Mrs. Chichak] MRS. CHICHAK: Mr. Speaker, March 18 was the date I adjourned debate. I didn't anticipate the motion would come up for debate this afternoon. However, be that as it may, we'll deal with it in a few brief comments. I refer, Mr. Speaker, to the motion put forward by the hon. Member for Drumheller and review just a few of the points he has raised.

At the outset, I would like to comment that the debate he put forward on that date has a great deal of strength and merit, and I'm sure reflects the feeling of many citizens, not only from Alberta but across the country. However, other issues need to be considered. In his debate, the hon. member put forward two

902 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976

definitions which he wished to be interpreted in the manner in which they were intended under this resolution. One was his definition of the death penalty, that it meant the ending of one's life by any method [selected] by an authorized body. That death penalty did not necessarily need to be by hanging. The other definition the hon. member wanted to make reference to — and did, at length — was to clarify what he intended to be considered in this resolution as murder. He intended that murder [mean] capital murder as defined under the Criminal Code of Canada.

He went on to read the sections of the Code which set out that definition. But under parliamentary law, there is also provision that Par­ liament, in addition to carrying out or letting stand a sentence meted out by the court — when such a sentence is a death penalty — also has the power to grant a stay of execution and to commute death sentences.

Whatever the historical reasons for this are, I'm sure one of them must be to facilitate the shortcomings in the laws man has made with respect to meting out penalties for actions which are against laws that are put in place in this country, and to overcome the shortcomings of a human being in judgment, in decision, in consideration of facts that may or may not be put forward and thereby, an innocent life may be taken unjustifiably. The hon. Member for Drumheller also made some comments to which I wish to refer directly.

On page 244 of Hansard, March 18, in referring to the Criminal Code of Canada, the hon. member stated: we have found the federal government loath to act upon and to carry out the law as it has been enacted by Parliament. But if we take into consideration that provision which allows Parliament to commute death sen­ tences, there may be some question as to the total accuracy of that statement. I am not saying at this time that there is, nor am I indicating I disagree with that point. I think I am doing neither at the moment.

He also went on to say: They are saying, it doesn't matter what the law says; we're not going to carry out the law. And when we have a government doing that in a democracy, we're defying the very essence of democracy. Further on in his speech, he goes on to say: Because democracy means that the government carries out the wishes of the people. I don't care how the federal government tries to get around this, it's not democracy if the govern­ ment is defying the wishes of the people. Well, there's a great deal of truth in that statement in itself, without relating it to any particular subject matter.

But by the same token, the people of Canada, including Albertans, in this democracy again have the right — and I think perhaps the responsibility — to convey to those members who represent them in the federal Parliament that they are not carrying out these wishes, and that the people are not in agreement with the direction the federal government is taking. I think that kind of expression has to be directed to those for whom they had the opportunity to vote or refrain from voting.

I am not sure that we, as a provincial government, can collectively and fairly express all the divergent points of view of Albertans on this very subject in one fell swoop. I think we have to impose the responsibility on every citizen if we are going to talk about or refer to a democratic system or process which requires a certain responsi­ bility of each of us. Further in the hon. member's presentation, he referred to a Canadian opinion poll and indicated some statistics, which at one point or another showed a very high level of concern that the death penalty should be meted out.

I believe the hon. member referred to a study carried out in 1974 by a Dr. Bibby. The reference to the study by Dr. Bibby, and another study and statistics compiled for a period from approximately 1940 to the present, indicate a fluctuation in the feeling or the expression of concern on the part of the people of Canada. It seemed that that fluctuation was very relevant to the incidence of a dramatic change in the degree of crime or trial influences during the span when a study or survey might be carried out.

It seemed that the reaction of the people fluctuated with the kinds of passions and emotions, inflamed or otherwise, as they were dic­ tated by the incidence of the commission of crime from one period of time to another. I think that this change or fluctuation must have something to do with our economic well-being, the economic health of the country, the availability of jobs, an individual's ability to earn a comfortable living — or if it was a time of strife. The hon. member also indicated that we have a tendency to pamper those who do not have a suffi­ cient respect for the law.

In his message he has indicated: There's a tendency to pamper the criminals, to make sure all rights of the criminals are pre­ served. Sometimes we forget about the rights of other citizens in this country. We're too anxious to support the rights of the thugs who are out to take life and to take the law into their own hands. In great measure I agree with those remarks, but we have to look at who has the tendency to pamper criminals.

If we simply reflect on current incidents of crime and violence, when these individuals who commit crime and violence are apprehended by our law enforcement officers or dealt with in the prisons to try to keep order, it is the public itself which then becomes compassionate and criticizes this strong enforcement, if such is the case. Only when it touches us close to our hearts, someone we know as a friend, someone who is a member of our family, do we become bitter. But time and time again this society has, in fact, reacted in the very way that the hon. Member for Drumheller suggests.

Are we laying the total blame on Parliament, on those who are elected, or should we lay some of this blame at our own doorsteps? As well, I can't help but feel my emotions rise from time to time, and I become very concerned about the very pampered way we deal with criminals. But will we resolve the problem by bringing in or extending capital punishment? Is that really going to cure the ills of our society, the ills that perhaps in one way or another each of us has played a

part in establishing? I'd like to refer to some reports that have currently come forward with respect to the position that the Solicitor General in the federal Parliament has taken and some of the concerns he has expressed. I think it might be worth while to look at the statements he has

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 903 made, at the positions that appear to be taken. Let us examine them from our own point of view. Perhaps about a month ago, the federal minister conveyed to the public his concern; he criticized capital punish­ ment on the basis that it had serious drawbacks. He has indicated that: In our system it has been found that where you have capital punishment for a wide range of murder . . . the juries . . . and I have to say the juries . . . are very hesitant to convict.

It appears he has found that juries are afraid to make a mistake and send a person to his death, and rather than send somebody to that very irreversible excessive penalty, as he indicates, they acquit, result­ ing in the person being back on the street with no conviction. I wonder if perhaps that point in itself is not a very strong argument for a need to examine the entire system of corporal punishment.

Another very interesting point which he makes from his review of what has been happening in this country with regard to crime and punishment is that capital punishment has been traditionally applied to a greater extent against the poor, the immigrants, and people with less education. Now, I'm not going to accept that statement simply because it is the Solici­ tor General of the federal Parliament who has taken that view. I think that is a reality. It has often been said, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. The rich find justice by one means or another and the poor pay the price.

I have a real concern about the percentage of our people in Canada who are below the poverty level, the number of people at this level who find themselves violating the law in one form or another. There we have to look at the cause, and then we must examine what ought to be the resolution of that very problem. This resolution states that we, as a government in this province, should make a recommendation to the federal Parliament that they must enforce capital punishment and not abolish it. If we in fact do this, who indeed then would suffer the most by this very act?

For an answer to that, I would simply have to read again this report that [it is] traditionally the poor, the immigrant, and the people with less education, because they are the ones who are struggling to exist, to live, to find a place. They have come, emotionally, passionately, to a conclusion that they can survive in no other way but to take what they need to live, in whatever manner they can get it. Because by being righteous, by following the law and by striving for it in a just and equitable way, they have not been able to succeed. And why?

Perhaps that segment of society which has been very affluent, which has managed to educate itself, which has managed in one way or another to earn a standard of living to be envied by many, is that segment of society which truly makes the majority of the laws, sets the standards others are expected to follow, and some­ times is very dispassionate with those who, for one reason or another, have not had the same opportunity. I think it is important, through this resolution, to impress on each individual citizen his or her respon­ sibility to be carried out as between that citizen and the federal parliament.

Because truly, so long as we have democracy in this country, that is the mechanism provided for conveying that expression of concern. I would have to question whether on behalf of each and every citizen, we can collectively express accurately a fair and honest view. If this were the means by which these expressions were to be made, then I would say that that is our responsibility and our duty. But I think that we would be endorsing an abdication of the very responsibility each citizen has on his or her own behalf, if we did the job for them. I think we would not do it adequately.

I think it is important that every citizen express his concern in his way, and the concern which they have which can vary so widely. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. DR. WALKER: Mr. Speaker, Hamberton once said: "The opinions of men who think are always growing and changing, like living children." The topic of capital punishment is indeed subject to the whims and changes of our times.

We seem to swing from the extremes of 100 years ago, when children were hanged for stealing a loaf of bread, to the present trend where barbaric murderers are maintained in well-nigh luxury jails, demanding privileges as pris­ oners which many of the less fortunate but more law-abiding members of our community cannot even afford. Facts are often stubborn reminders to us that our impressions are not always correct. The impression that capital punishment reduces violent crime in a country does not seem to have been borne out by the statistical facts of research projects both here in Canada and in many other lands.

If we must kill in retaliation for violent crime, then I believe we can kill in a humane manner — for example, with a hypodermic injection of narcotic drugs in lethal doses — but not in the barbaric way that has been [used] in the past. Less than one-third of the hangings in this country have been carried out properly, which is by breaking the cervical spine and transecting the spinal cord, causing instant death. Approximately one-third of hangings strangle the victim to death; another third literally yank the heads off. It would be a worth-while exercise for members of the Legislature to attend a hanging.

I would be very interested to know how many of them, afterwards, would approve of hanging as a method of killing. AN HON. MEMBER: Agreed. DR. WALKER: The greatness of our courts lies not in being strong, but in the proper use of strength when it is indicated, and having sentences carried out and adhered to. Seventy per cent of murders in Canada are the result of domestic squabbles by people who have never before been involved in any violent crime. I do not concur that the death sentence will stop the killings.

But I do know there are psychopathic killers in our society who must be removed from this earth, not as a punishment to the offender but as a kindness to innocent people who must be able to live and go about their duties without fear of indiscriminate violence against them. When a person's mind becomes so deranged that his whole living becomes bent on violence and destruction without any rationale or knowledge of the immorality or illegality of his actions, then I do not believe we have a cure for him, and he has to be recognized as an absolute failure of our whole

904 ALBERTA HANSARD April 27, 1976 system. Is it right for us to legislate the ultimate penalty for killers of policemen and jail guards, yet the killers of judges, lawyers, and other prominent citizens can recline in the relative comfort of our penal institutions with a reasonably good assurance of release in seven or 10 years, when they can come out and repeat their misguided pursuits? At least the rapid extermination of offenders precludes any repeaters.

The whole question of capital punishment is so charged with prejudice and emotion that I very much doubt if we can collectively influence our confreres in Ottawa who have their own feelings on the matter which may not necessarily tally with the wishes of their constituents. But I do feel that when legislation is eventually decided on, legislators should cease playing games with sentences, and that only in very extreme and extenuating circumstances should a death sentence be commuted to imprisonment or otherwise avoid the intent of the law of Canada.

While there may be differing degrees of capital crime, depending on the intent involved, the punishment should be related to this intent and not related to the age, sex, or occupation of the unfortunate victim. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I feel that each of us can influence, or at least advise, our federal confreres of our individual views. But if these views are in conflict with theirs, I doubt they will be voiced on our behalf. It is often difficult when one is up to one's neck in alligators to remember that the primary objective was to drain the swamp.

I wish our federal confreres well in coming to a reasonable conclusion on capital punishment and its enforcement. MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, in rising to debate this matter once again in this House, I still feel that there are certain sentiments in our society which go back many thousands of years, particularly to early biblical times when it was an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. When you look at those times in which those laws were first laid down, there were very good reasons for having such laws. AN. HON. MEMBER: How do you know? MR. MUSGREAVE: How do I know, the hon. member asked.

Well, it was obviously a rural society, living in very tough times. The lifespan was about 30, and the protection of the tribe was all-important. You had to deal out justice swiftly and effectively, and all members of the tribe had to know what would happen to them if they didn't obey the rules. AN HON. MEMBER: That's what we need. AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear. MR. MUSGREAVE: But, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the Legislative Assembly, does it reduce the number of offences? Does it contribute to a peaceful society? Does it increase our respect for life? Does it classify citizens?

One kind of citizen would lose his life if he killed a policeman; however, if he killed a girl in a rape or a bank clerk during a holdup he wouldn't lose his life. At present, Mr. Speaker, there is great pressure on legislatures, by police associations in particular, for hanging those whose lives are lost when they're performing their duties as policemen or as prison guards. I appreciate that there are returns from the people showing that 85 per cent of the citizens of western Canada feel the death penalty should be brought into effect.

I'm concerned that this motion doesn't distinguish between capital and non-capital murder. It simply says murder. As the hon. Member for Macleod pointed out, over half the situations are domestic. So if we approve this motion, if a man killed his wife in a fit of rage or vice versa, our society would in effect say, yes, we support that and we'll now dispose of the other partner, in effect creating orphans. I'm sure we don't want to adopt that attitude. I'd like to point out, Mr.

Speaker, that those who are charged with murder are usually poorly moti­ vated, of a lower educational level and poor mental health attitudes, and usually come from a poor background or no background of family life. Surely the hon. Member for Drumheller and those members of this Legislature who would support this motion don't believe this society should be taking an aggres­ sive attitude to those to whom we should be putting out a helping hand. I appreciate the fact that at times of murder emotions are brought to the fore, but I think we here have to be more rational in our decisions.

We've got to represent all the people, not just those who fill out petitions. We've got to represent the poor, the sick, the stupid, and the uneducated, not just those who can respond to a cleverly worded petition put together by politicians in Ottawa who quite frequently are too lazy to study, think, investigate, or generally do any hard work to try to find out what the true situation should be with relation to legislation. It should be a great concern to all citizens of Canada that police forces are lobbying governments for punitive legislation.

It should be a great concern to all citizens of Canada that this week a police force in Canada was on strike for more money. Now this is where our society has got to, and yet the police forces in Canada, particularly those in the urban scenes, are among the highest paid in the world. Mr. Speaker, the great concern I have regarding pressure from police or guard lobbies is the great tendency to react to violence in a violent way. In years gone by, we used to hang people for stealing sheep, we used to garrote them, we used to cut off their hands, put out their eyes, castrate them, split them in two.

We even burned them. But we still have murder and all the horrendous crimes we're familiar with. Mr. Speaker, in the past we did every inhuman thing we could think of. It's a great concern to me that we don't let police or paramilitary groups push us into a police-state mentality. To suggest that we should support legislation that our federal members say is necessary — and it comes quite often from the uninstructed, the uninformed, the emotion­ al, the uncaring flighty public opinion, because 85 per cent want hanging — is destroying the purpose of democracy. We have a small gallery here.

We have the press able to report on television what we do. But we represent all the people; not just the few who are able to come here and listen to us, not just the few who might happen to read the newspapers or watch television, but all the people; not just the most vocal

April 27, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 905 or the uninformed, but every citizen in the province. It would make as much sense to me to set our wheat prices on a survey of what the farmers want, rather than what the highest buyer would pay, or determine the size of our police forces on the number of dollars they think they could spend. Mr. Speaker, I'm unhappy with our federal gov­ ernment breaking the law as it relates to capital punishment. I'm unhappy with the parole system. I'm unhappy with life terms being short terms. And I'm very unhappy that we have long delays in punishment of criminals.

The tendency of Canada is to repeat all the mistakes made in western civilization in treatment of prisoners. But of more concern to me, Mr. Speaker, is that this motion is not in our jurisdiction. I think it's impertinent of this Legislature to be suggesting to the federal members what they should do in the way of legislation. As I said previously in the House, there's nothing to prevent an individual MLA from sitting down and writing to his MP. There are a lot more concerns that we should have in our relations with the government.

I feel that for us to get involved in this situation is only going to lead to a straining of relations with the federal scene. Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out one reason I do not support the tendency, particularly in western Canada — and I know we live near an agrarian population. I know that many of us are only one generation from the farm. Some of us are still on the farm. I know that a rifle or shotgun is an integral part of any farmhouse. I know that some members of this Legislature have said that their weapons have sat so long in their living rooms that they are now rusty and wouldn't work anyway.

But I'd like to point out that public acceptance — and I'd like to quote, Mr. Speaker, from a report by a criminologist in a univer­ sity in British Columbia. "Public acceptance cannot and does not convey any legitimacy upon a cruel, demeaning, and bestial practice. "In a civilized society, lynching is abhorred, though it is more than any act a spontaneous expression of public opinion and a true manifes­ tation of what the public wants." Dr. Fattah said public opinion is subject to wide swings and is too changeable to be reliable.

"The fact is, simply, that the public doesn't care about the death penalty except when some dramatic crime or trial influences passions and inflames emotions." So, Mr. Speaker, to get back to my main concern on the motion, I think it would be unfortunate if this Assembly requested the federal government to do anything with regard to bringing back the law for death penalty; particularly, as the motion says, for murder. We have a great amount of work before us. This is a field of federal jurisdiction, and in my opinion as mentioned last session we should vote this motion down and get on with our business.

The Government of Canada is hard-pressed on the matter, and it's very emotional, but it will reflect our relations with them in health — our health minister is down there now — in education, and in revenue sharing. Mr. Speaker, I cannot understand why this kind of motion is on the Order Paper when, in my view, it is clearly out of our area of concern and responsibilities as elected members of the Legislature of Alber