Alberta Hansard — 14 March 2007, Afternoon sitting (13:00) (Legislature 26, Session 3)

20070314

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 119 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title:Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:00 p.m. Date: 07/03/14 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Let us pray. Author of all wisdom, knowledge, and understand- ing, we ask for guidance in order that truth and justice may prevail in all of our judgments. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Energy. Mr. Knight: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is again a pleasure for me to rise this afternoon to intr oduce to you and through you to all of my colleagues in the House 13 special guests from the Department of Energy that have joined us today in the members’ gallery. We have Sylvia Presiznuik, Gail Marusyn, Deborah Boelstler, Yolanda Hutchings, Yasmin Suleman, Donna McLachlan, Beth Holmes, Danielle Haverstock, Olena Urban, Julia Hai, Brent Fuhr, Ryan Borador, Raelyn Huseby. I would ask them all to stand, please, to receive the warm welcome of my colleagues. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Finance. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It’s an honour and privilege to introduce to you and through you to the Members of the Legislative Assembly 12 members of the Finance department. We talk very much about our public service and the great jobs they do, but quite simply if it wasn’t for people in the tax and revenue administration, the investment management division, the strategic and business services, we wouldn’t be able to carry on our work.

So I’d ask Anne Bethell, Bonnie Toh, Dustin Gumpinger, Elaine Siu, Ivy Wong, James Ackroyd, Jeff Urbanowski, Jerry Brige, Jim Daye, Jonathan Herman, Trevor Bilan, and Wilfred Chan to all stand and receive the very warm welcome and appreciation of the Legislative Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka. Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my honour again to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a group of students and their adult leaders from the Clive school. They’re grade 6 students. There are 16 of them. They are accompa- nied by teachers Mrs.

Marla Kolybaba and Miss Kelly Janisse. Parent helpers are Mr. Garth Rowley, Mr. Howard Hopkins, Naomi Bennett, and Mrs. Deniese Lyons. Now, this group has always been accompanied by a teacher by the name of Bob MacKinnon. He was not able to be here this year – he’s been here 17 years in a row – due to some health issues in his family. So he hopes to be back next year. I would ask my students and parents to rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for St. Albert. Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to introduce to you and through you to the members of the Assembly 74 students from Leo Nickerson school in St. Albert and t eachers Ms Desjardins, Mme Scharf, Mr. Paul Annicchiarico, Mrs. Wawrychuk, Mrs. Hussey, and Mrs. Morgan and parent Mrs. Van Hoeve. I wish them to rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is an honour and privilege to rise today and introduce to you and through you to all hon. Members of this Legislative Assembly a fine gentleman from Mexico. Mr.

Armando Garcia is visiting the Legislative Assembly this afternoon. He is married with two small children. He is a graduate of the University of Guadalajara, specializing in veterinary medicine. He tells me that he had an excellent academic record there, and he has the documents to prove it. He is in Canada as a temporary foreign worker; his visa expires in November of 2007. He was limited and restricted in his work, but he was working on a corporate farm out east of Provost. He was on the farm that is named on the visa, and it is named C.G. Paulgaard Farms Ltd. I would now ask Mr. Garcia to please rise.

I don’t know which gallery he’s in, but if he would rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m very pleased to rise today to introduce the driving forces behind one of the most exciting community projects occurring in Alberta. Christy Cholak- Morin is the executive director of Arts on the Avenue as well as a director, producer, drama coach, and artist in residence with Edmonton public schools.

Michelle Hayduk is a resident commer- cial design expert who spends much of her time volunteering with the local community grassroots organization known as Arts on the Avenue. Scott Peters is best known as a founding member of the local Celtic band Captain Tractor and has also worked in the theatre arts community with nearly every professional theatre group in the city over the past 20 years. With him is his four-year-old son, Thorin Freeman-Peters. These three individuals are together working towards restoring and redeveloping the Alberta Avenue area.

They brought about many fantastic things: the Arts Alive! fall festival, assistance for community theatre, and with the help of my constituency office the upcoming Workers Art Show as part of the May Week celebrations. They are seated in the public gallery, Mr. Speaker, and I would now ask that they rise and receive the warm, traditional welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I’m delighted to introduce to you and through you to the members of this Assembly Vesna Kovacic.

Vesna is currently a social work student at Grant MacEwan College and is completing her practicum in my constituency office from September of 2006. Vesna’s family has been in Alberta since moving from Saskatchewan in 1979. Vesna herself moved back to Alberta to be closer to her family and to pursue a lifelong passion of becoming a social worker. Vesna has been a very valuable part of our team in the constituency of Edmonton-Calder, and we are grateful for all of her hard work. I would ask her now, please, to rise and to receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Strathcona.

Alberta Hansard March 14, 2007120 Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am very pleased today to introduce to you and through you to this House Denise Ogonoski. Denise is a lifetime Edmontonian who started this past January as a constituency assistant in our Edmonton-Strathcona constituency office. Currently Denise is completing her political science degree at the University of Alberta. She was a media delegate at the World Social Forum in Venezuela last year and volunteered for the People’s Pedal bicycle co-op. Mr.

Speaker, you and other members of the House are invited to come and visit my constituency and McIntyre park, where this co-op usually has a stall of bicycles which are available for us to use, and that would mean that we control the emissions that go into the atmosphere and create problems for us. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my constituents I would like to thank Denise for the service she is already providing to the constituents of Edmonton-Strathcona. We all look forward to seeing her continue her excellent work.

Denise is seated in public gallery, and now I’ll ask her to please stand to receive the warm welcome of the Assem- bly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Alberta has a long history of strong ethnic and cultural ties with the Ukraine. Nearly 10 per cent of Albertans have Ukrainian ancestry. Just to name a few in this Assembly we have Danyluk, and we have Zwozdesky and Cenaiko, and we also have Premier Stelmach. Joining us today in your gallery is the ambassador of the Ukraine, His Excellency Mr.

Ostash, and his lovely wife, Mrs. Hrymych, and their young son Danylo. The ambassador met with the Premier and other ministers and had a state dinner today at Government House. I’d like to ask them all to rise at this point. [Remarks in Ukrainian] 1:10 The Speaker: His Excellency is also a 12-year veteran of the Ukrainian Parliament. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Mr. R. Miller: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great honour to have the opportunity today to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly Danielle Smith.

Danielle is the director of provincial affairs for the Canadian Federation of Independent Business here in Alberta, an organization which many of you will know represents 9,200 businesses in Alberta. She was here today, Mr. Speaker, lobbying members of the Official Opposition and presenting the CFIB’s prebudget presenta- tion to the Official Opposition caucus. In the spirit of openness and accountability and in an effort to pre-empt Bill 1, Danielle has asked if the Canadian Federation of Independent Business might be the first organization to register as a lobbyist. They would be proud to do so.

I would ask Danielle to please rise – she’s in the public gallery – and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: Hon. members, we’ve been on TV since 1 o’clock contrary to what the chair said yesterday. The hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka. Canadian Agricultural Safety Week Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to rise today to remind all Albertans, especially our farming community, which includes the grade 6 class from the Clive school, that starting today and running until March 20 is Canadian Agricultural Safety Week.

Farm safety is a crucial part of agriculture in this province and an important part of keeping all rural Albertans safe. This year’s theme, Protect Your Moving Parts, focuses on the importance of using caution when working around farm machinery. It also encourages farmers to use proper guarding and shielding to prevent accidents from occurring. Mr. Speaker, according to the Canadian agricultural injury surveillance program, farm machinery accidents, which include being entangled, pinned, or struck by machinery, were the leading cause of hospitalized injuries on Canadian farms from 1990-2000.

In Alberta there are an average of 18 farm-related deaths per year. Seventy per cent of the incidents involved farm machinery, and sadly, like most fatalities on farms, these deaths were preventable. Education and information are the most powerful ways to impact behaviour, and I would like to applaud the organizers and sponsors of this year’s Alberta Farm Safety Week for their hard work and dedication to keeping Alberta farms safe places to work and grow. I am pleased that our government is a partner in the launch of a new ad campaign aimed at youth and new farm workers.

Youth make up a significant portion of new farm workers, and farm safety education and awareness for this group is a particular focus of this government. I’m proud to be a part of a government that cares about helping our young people and new farm workers. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my privilege to recognize Canadian Agricultural Safety Week from March 14 to March 20. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Per Capita Federal Funding Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Canada Statistics just released a census document titled Portrait of the Canadian Popula- tion in 2006.

A subtitle is Alberta: The Engine of Population Growth. The Canada census has just proven what we have wit- nessed for years. Between 2001 and ’06 Canada’s population growth was the highest in the G-8 countries. Three-quarters of Canadian population growth is thanks to the joining of people from many parts of the world. Canada’s population growth between 2001 and ’06 was higher than the previous intercensal period. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend our Premier in setting manage- ment of growth as one of the government’s five top priorities.

There is tremendous growth pressure experienced in Alberta in general and in our constituencies in Calgary in particular. Alberta’s population has now reached 3.3 million. Its population growth of 10.6 per cent is the highest in the country, twice the national average. If the province continues to grow at least 10 per cent every five years, then our population would double between 2 006 and mid- 2030. So Alberta now has topped 10 per cent of our national population for the first time. Myself and the majority of my constituents believe that sharing the federal financial allocation should be based on per capita.

If every Canadian taxpayer follows the same national rule, every Canadian should be treated equitably. It doesn’t matter where he or she lives. Alberta should receive federal funding on a fair per capita principle. Realizing that growth pressure and needs are everywhere, I would suggest that our provincial government persuade our federal government to apply the fair per capita funding principle to Alberta and that within Alberta the per capita funding principles should be considered as well. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 121 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie.*** Canada Safeway Charitable Donations Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For a number of years now Canada Safeway has supported local area charities through their Because We Care campaign. Each year individual Safeway stores adopt a charity and conduct a number of fundraising events in their store to raise funds for their local community groups.

The Mill Woods Town Centre Safeway store has partnered with Edmonton Meals on Wheels, that is a not-for-profit organization that relies on volunteers to provide a nutritious meal program which promotes health and wellness and independence for their clients. Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, March 10, I joined a number of Meals on Wheels volunteers and Safeway staff in helping promote this event. Since selecting Meals on Wheels as their charity in 2005, the Mill Woods Safeway has raised more than $25,000 for this worthwhile cause.

Since 1998 customers and employees of Canada Safeway have raised more than $9.7 million to help over 1,400 charities in Canada. I ask my fellow Members of the Alberta Legislative Assembly to join me in saluting this outstanding commitment to our local communities. Thank you. Vauxhall Academy of Baseball Mr. McFarland: I attended the Vauxhall baseball academy as it held its first banquet and fundraiser this past Saturday, Mr. Speaker. This is an exciting concept: the first high school baseball academy in Canada, that is putting small-town, rural Alberta on the national map.

In its first school year the Vauxhall baseball academy has attracted 21 student players from Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick. Young men in grades 10, 11, and 12 have joined the Vauxhall Jets team from Calgary, Chinook, Hays, Lethbridge, Medicine Hat, Strathmore, Rocky Mountain House, Round Hill, Taber, and Vauxhall in Alberta as well as from Imperial in Saskatchewan, Kentville in Nova Scotia, Sussex Corner in New Brunswick, and Winnipeg, Manitoba. This year’s award recipients included one player who maintains a 95 per cent average.

The goals that these players have targeted include a career in dentistry, two in pre-med, three in engineering, and one has been accepted into the aerospace program in Alabama. The Jets’ stadium, their home diamond, is one of the finest outdoor facilities in rural Canada and one of only eight lighted stadiums in all of Alberta. Vauxhall high school is a smaller 2A high school that faced the prospect of not having a basketball team this year. In a great show of support nine of the baseball Jets players stepped forward to help fill the basketball team roster for their school.

On Saturday, hours before their awards banquet, the Vauxhall basketball team, competing up at the 3A level, won the zone finals. They outscored their opposition in the final game by 50 points, earning a berth this weekend in the provincial 3A basketball finals in Rocky Mountain House, Alberta. Their principal, Todd Ojala, commended the boys on their accomplishment not only for their three hour per day basketball workout but also for all their accomplishments. They are billeted with families in the community.

I want to compliment the coaches, Les McTavish and assistant coach Jim Kotkas, and all the teaching staff of Vauxhall for a very supportive program. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner. 1:20 Warner Girls Hockey School Mr. Hinman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Some things are so good and so important and so exciting that they’re worth repeating, and I’d like to thank the hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat for alerting this Assembly to the hockey jewel of the province, the Warner Hockey School for Girls. What an outstanding opportunity for young women to develop and pursue their dream of hockey.

This is a classic Alberta heritage story of blazing a new path, a story of not just surviving but thriving and rising to the top where skeptics said that it couldn’t be done. It all started with a question – how do we keep our high school open? – and then a dream that evolved into a hockey school for girls, followed by an unbelievable am ount of hard work, sacrifice, dedication of the volunteers in both hours and donations. This is truly hockey at its best. They have attracted young women from across Canada, the U.S., and Sweden.

In just four short years the graduates from this school have received over $3 million in scholarships and bursaries from recruiting ins titutions. They play in the Alberta Major Midget Female Hockey League and have won the league the last three years. They just got back from a trip to the Maritimes, where they played against the St. Thomas University team, winning a decisive 10-2 victory. The next day they played Dalhousie University, winning 3- 2. They then went on to play Team Nova Scotia, where they allowed two of their top players to play for their home team. They won 7-5.

A day’s rest and then they played Team P.E.I. and won 3- 0 and the next night 4-1. They have now won the hearts of many Canadians on CBC’s Kraft Hockeyville competition. Go to the cbc.ca/hockeyville website, watch the three-minute video, and then vote for Warner. Watch the other videos, and then vote for Warner again. Vote often, and support Alberta’s hockey school. Warner has a population of 379; Cornwall, 55,000; North Bay, 53,000. Warner not only deserves our support; they need it. Let’s make Hockeyville Albertaville. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. U of A Pandas Volleyball Team Dr.

Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I’m sure everybody here knows, my constituency is the proud home of the University of Alberta, and it’s a great honour and privilege today to recognize the U of A Pandas volleyball team. The number one ranked Pandas captured their seventh CIS crown with a 3-1 defeat of the defending national champions, the Laval Rouge et Or. Led by CIS player of the year and tournament MVP Tiffany Dodds, the Pandas produced a great team effort. Dodds finished the game with 17 kills, putting away the game point.

Rookie Samantha Wojtkiw and Alexa Berton recorded a combined 10 blocks while Jocelyn Blair had 12 kills. Wojtkiw finished with 12 kills, three aces, and an 87 per cent hitting percentage. Jocelyn Blair and Daryl Roper were named tournament all-stars. Special recognition should also go to their head coach, Laurie Eisler, a three-time CIS coach of the year, a Panda coach since 1991. These hard-working and dedicated young women deserve tremen- dous respect and admiration for their accomplishments and for bringing yet another CIS banner home to the U of A.

Congratula- tions to the Pandas. head: Presenting Petitions The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View.

Alberta Hansard March 14, 2007122 Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I present a petition from a number of signatories in Alberta, undersigned residents petitioning the Legislative Assembly to ur ge the government to consider providing additional funds for the Calgary health region to “proceed immediately and as originally planned with the construction of a hospital in south Calgary.” The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am presenting quite a number of tablings with the right number of copies for a petition supporting Gary Hunt in his efforts.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Livingstone-Macleod. Mr. Coutts: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today on behalf of the hon. Member for Lac La Biche-St. Paul to table a letter and a petition from 193 Albertans from the Buffalo Lake Métis settlement and the surrounding area asking the government to introduce legislation to enforce mandatory use of helmets when operating a quad, trike, or any ATV, enforce an age limit for the operation of ATVs, and for smaller ATVs to have manufacturers put governing mechanisms on because children are operating them. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr.

Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m presenting a petition signed by 64 citizens in Edmonton urging the Legislative Assembly to urge the government of Alberta to complete as soon as possible the overpasses and interchanges at the locations where Anthony Henday Drive, the Edmonton ring road, intersects Lessard Road, Callingwood Road, and Cameron Heights Road. Thank you. head: Notices of Motions Mr. Renner: I beg, maybe, some advice from the Speaker on the new process. The government wishes to advise the House that written questions and mo tions for returns stand and retain their places.

Do I give notice of that motion now, or do I simply make that statement? The Speaker: Notice. head: Introduction of Bills The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Public Security and Solicitor General. Bill 16 Police Amendment Act, 2007 Mr. Lindsay: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce Bill 16, the Police Amendment Act, 2007. These amendments to the Police Act will allow the establishment of a provincial body to investigate police when someone has been seriously injured or dies as a result of the direct actions of a police officer.

This team would also investigate highly sensitive or serious matters involving police. The proposed amendments will also give the province the option of taking over lock-up facilities from municipal police agencies. Alberta corrections officers or Alberta sheriffs could be used for these operations. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 16 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Nose Hill. Bill 17 Limitation Statutes Amendment Act, 2007 Dr. Brown: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I request leave to introduce Bill 17, the Limitation Statutes Amendment Act, 2007. [Motion carried; Bill 17 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that Bill 17 be moved onto the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Bill 18 Judicature Amendment Act, 2007 Mr. Stevens: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce a bill being the Judicature Amendment Act, 2007.

This act amends the Judicature Act to empower Alberta’s courts to deal more effectively with vexatious litigants. The Judicature Act deals with the jurisdiction powers of the Court of Queen’s Bench and the Court of Appeal. It also deals with the administration of justice in the province, including some matters of the provincial court. The proposed amendments to this act will remove the requirement to obtain the Attorney General’s consent to make an application to have a person declared a vexatious litigant.

Amend- ments to this act will give all th ree courts the jurisdiction to hear vexatious litigant applications. [Motion carried; Bill 18 read a first time] head: Statement by the Speaker Oral Question Period The Speaker: Hon. members, we’ll come back to introductions. But before we commence Oral Question Period today, in what is the second day of the operation of the “rules,” the chair would like to make a comment. As the chair indicated yesterday, there was nothing in the Standing Orders revisions adopted last Monday night concerning the operation of Oral Question Period.

Section 3(a)(ii) of the House leaders’ agreement states that questions and answers shall be 45 seconds, which is the general rule that the chair has been applying since the start of the 26th Legislature in March of 2005. There was no mention in the House leaders’ agreement about

preambles to questions or deviating from the accepted practice of limiting

preambles to supplementary questions. 1:30 However, the chair has had an opportunity now to meet with all three House leaders this morning. This is the first time that we have met during the process leading to the House leaders’ agreement. This was a very positive step in communicating about the intention and expectations of the House leaders about the March 7 agreement. If you’ve ever seen the movie Lost in Translation , about the guy who goes to Tokyo, just think of that as I go through the rest of this.

After that meeting the chair will be vigorously enforcing the 45- second rule from the time the member is recognized until the end of the 45 seconds. This will apply to questions, and this will apply to

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 123 answers. It may involve stopwatches. This is how it will work in practice. When the chair rises and says, “The Leader of the Official Opposition,” when that “n” is heard by one of the table officers, a click will go on in a watch. The chair will administer the House as normal, and within five seconds the chair will notice that there are five seconds left, and then bang; you know, like they do in football, baseball, and everything else. It won’t be this. It’ll be that. Okay? Second thing. During the 45-second period – and this will apply to questions rather than answers –

preambles will be allowed, whether main or supplementary questions. It seems to be the overwhelming desire of the members. So you’ve got 45 seconds for the question. In the past it was a pretty vigorous

interpretation: no

preambles in the second or third question. Now permitted. The chair also wants to make it very clear that when that clock starts counting on the “n,” if the hon. members stand up and cheer the hon. member for 30 seconds, the clock has been running. That means there are only 15 seconds left for the remainder of the question. Now, I know my hon. colleagues – I’ve been here for a number of years – so I know what the potential is of happening. Okay? The chair wants to make one thing very clear. He has no diffi- culty whatsoever enforcing this provision.

The chair would point out that Standing Order 13(1), which has not changed, requires the Speaker to preserve order and decorum. In the chair’s experience what often causes question period to become unruly are inflamma- tory

preambles that have little to do with the question that is to be asked. So while the chair will allow the greatest latitude to members in their questions and answers, the chair will not let question period deteriorate into a situation that would serve to bring this institution into disrepute and in the process reflect poorly on all members, especially other members who are not involved in the shenanigans. If there are concerns about the operation of question period, the chair would encourage members to bring those concerns to his or her House leader. This

interpretation was arrived at about 11:30 this morning, so some members may not be aware of it, but the deal was that the House leaders are to bring this updated version of the rule to all of his or her members. Remember as well that we have another opportunity for members to convey their thoughts, and that is to the chair of the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections, Standing Orders and Printing, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Creek, as this committee is to have a role in reviewing the operation of the rule changes. Please do not send notes to the chair, as happened yesterday.

The chair wants to be very clear that he is committed to ensuring that the operation of the Assembly represents the expectation of members. It is your Assembly, and the chair has been elected to enforce your rules.

To the two independent members in the House, I’d invite them to come and visit me at 4:30 this afternoon because in addition to this clarification, the chair also provided to the three House leaders a list of questions and comments with respect to the proposed changes to the rules of the Assembly and al so provided to the three House leaders, as best as one can determine, an anticipated budget to implement all of these changes and these rules. The three House leaders will provide that information to their caucus members.

I will provide that to the two member s in the Assembly who were not present at the meeting this morning and, if required, will table those documents in the House at a subsequent date, but I do not anticipate that this will be required. So, Micheline, are we ready? head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Red Deer River Water Transfer Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As is often said in this Assem- bly, whiskey is for drinking, and water is for fighting over.

The people of the Red Deer River Valley are ready to fight over the transfer of water from their river to a shopping mall on the edge of Calgary. To the Premier: how can the Premier claim that this government is supporting a fair process on the Balzac water transfer licence application when various ministers have publicly supported and applauded this project and the government itself voted $4.8 million to help pay for it? Mr. Stelmach: The process in terms of reviewing water licences has been in place for many years in this province, and in fact, Mr.

Speaker, it might have been implemented way back when you were a Minister of Environment, so it’s got a lot of history to it. It’s proven that it’s fair to both sides, and we will follow the process that has been established. The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is another issue on which this government is so divided. Not long after various ministers applauded the project and approved the money, this Premier hit the campaign trail and called the project ridiculous. I’ll table a docu- ment demonstrating that.

Why did this Premier call the project ridiculous when his own government was supporting it? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I’ll wait to review the so-called documents that the Leader of the Opposition has, but I have to reiterate: there is a process in place. There’s a quasi-judicial authority that’s put in place to evaluate the information coming on both sides for this water application or any other water application that there is in the province of Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given that the Premier called the project ridiculous and said that he would investigate it, can the Premier explain now why he has flip-flopped on this project? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the hon. leader has to be very careful in the kind of words he uses. I am now the Premier of the province of Alberta, and I would not be one to break the rules that have been established through law in this Assembly. If that’s the kind of leadership he expects to see from this Premier, he is dead wrong. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you.

I think the Premier was expected to keep his word from the campaign trail, Mr. Speaker. As the Balzac water transfer makes so clear, there is a process for well-connected people and a process for the rest of us. Given that yesterday the Premier said, and I quote, if there have been promises made by individuals that might have been in government or are no longer in government, then I would like to know about them, end quote, has the Premier bothered to try to find out about those secret promises?

Alberta Hansard March 14, 2007124 Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, he’s the one that says that there’s a secret deal. He was in the scrum yesterday. I asked him right in front of all the TV cameras: you’re calling it a secret deal? You’re saying to this House, I believe, that there’s some sort of a secret deal. You’ve got the documents. Present them right now, right in front of the cameras. The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, the fix is in on this project.

This government has placed a $4.8 million bet that this project will be approved when last August it voted that much money, and I’ll quote the government’s own budget documents: to support a horse-racing track and equine centre at Balzac. Given that this government destroyed due process last year when it voted the money for this project and various ministers applauded it, will the Premier just save the people of the Red Deer River basin the trouble and cost of fighting the licence and just put an end to this water transfer right now? 1:40 Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, the leader mentioned before that I wasn’t keeping my promise to those individuals during the campaign trail. Well, we have moved very quickly on the housing strategy. We are negotiating an immigration agreement with the federal government. We’ve already addressed the issues in Fort McMurray. We’ve opened this House to more transparency, obviously, with the new agreement we have allowing for greater consideration of business and committee work. I think we’ve come a long way in the last – what? – 90 days. Dr. Taft: Tell the people of Red Deer.

It’s time for this government to stop playing games with Alberta’s water. There should be no secret deals for that water. This makes a mockery of due process and the whole issue of consulting with Albertans. To the Premier: why should anybody trust or engage in public consultations with this go vernment when they so clearly ignore the wishes of Albertans? Mr. Stelmach: Well, Mr. Speaker, very clearly because they can trust us to do the right thing. Quite frankly, if the hon. leader is not aware, again, of the process that’s in place, the hon. Minister of Environment can certainly articulate it again in the House.

The Speaker: Third Official Opposition question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Temporary Foreign Workers Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Armando Garcia, who was introduced earlier, is a temporary foreign worker from Guadala- jara, Mexico. He came to Alberta to work on a large farm expecting to receive health benefits, overtime pay, and a reimbursement of travel costs, but instead he faced a broken contract and a restrictive work visa that limits him from finding other employment. This is one case, but I fear it’s the tip of the iceberg.

As the number of temporary foreign workers entering Alberta increases, many workers are facing similar problems due to this government’s failure to ensure that the rights of these workers are adequately protected. My questions are to the Premier. Given that an increase in the number of foreign . . . The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. Mr. Stelmach: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do want to of course welcome to this Assembly Armando Garcia from Guadalajara, and I also want to state to this Assembly that I had a very pleasant visit when I was minister of international and intergovernmental relations with the then President, Vicente Fox, who asked this province of Alberta to continue the good working relationship we have with Mexico to allow people from their country to come to our province, work here, earn some money. I was astonished at the amount of GDP, Mexican GDP, that comes from Mexicans that leave their country and send money back to sustain their families back home.

The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will table the employment contract of Mr. Garcia later, and it appears that all kinds of things were broken. Health insurance was promised. Workplace safety insurance was promised. Lots of money was deducted from his paycheque to pay for plane fares. My question, then, is to the Premier. This man has tremendous courage coming here to speak out against his employer. What guarantees are in place to ensure that other employees who are bound to employers through their work visa will be able to speak out without any repercussions? Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, in terms of the details, would our minister responsible, at least today, for this issue please give us the details. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Danyluk: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I want to say that temporary workers receive the same protections as any other workers in Alberta, and I also want to say that the Ministry of Employment, Immigration and Industry will look into this case. In Alberta this is not common.

I mean, we take violations of a code very seriously and investigate every complaint that is brought forward, and we need to look at this information and the individual circumstances before we can determine what, if any, potential . . . The Speaker: Hon. member, we’ve just had another little test of our rule

interpretation. That 45-second response time does not include an additional 45 seconds for supplementals. The hon. member. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I fear that this is the Chinese head tax all over again. People from China came here to help build the railroad, and then they were sent back. A hundred years later the Prime Minister of Canada has to apologize to them. So my question is to the Premier. I mean, are you going to have to be in a position to apologize to these workers for all the poor conditions they’ve been working under as they are sent back after a year?

What kind of experience is this for Alberta? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, when a member of the opposition brings up the Chinese head tax, that was an embarrassment to this country at a very critical stage of development. This is very early in history, but it happened to be the same time that my ancestors came to this country. I fully understand the kind of discrimination that there was at this time, so I don’t need any prompting from any opposition member to relate to me some of the issues that early immigrants had to face in this country.

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 125 Climate Change Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Environment held a news conference in which he announced that Alberta was taking climate change seriously. He brought documents, he brought questionnaires, and he brought logos. That was five years ago. Today this Minister of Environment went through the same whole dog-and-pony show again. Even the logo is the same. To the Premier: how many times do we have to go through this phony consultation exercise on climate change before the government takes real action to fix the problem? Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, given what the minister presented this morning in terms of climate change, I’d allow the minister to answer the question. Mr. Renner: Well, I just very quickly, Mr. Speaker, remind the member that the world that we live in has changed significantly in the past five years, and I look forward to elaborating on further questions. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, they ignored it five years ago. How do we know they won’t ignore it today? Here it was five years ago. The same thing, same logo today.

The news release from 2002 said, “Results from the consultation pr ocess will be used to finalize Alberta’s action plan.” Which action plan, and when will it really be finalized? Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, I have spent the last three months since I was appointed Minister of Environment travelling around the province talking to all of the employees of Environment. The key message that I delivered everywhere I went was: in politics timing is everything. Guess what? The timing is absolutely right, and we are going to be able to do things that previous ministers could only dream of doing.

Industry is onside, the public is onside, and the public demands that we take action. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the minister could tell us why the government has failed to take action in the past five years? This minister has been a member of that government. This Premier was a member of that government. That caucus hasn’t changed, but in five years nothing has been done. What assurances do we have that you’re going to do something this time? Mr. Renner: Mr.

Speaker, I’d like to remind the hon. member that much has happened over the past five years, beginning with the introduction of Canada’s first climate change legislation, the loop on which just closed with the introduction of Bill 3. This consultation takes us positively into the future instead of worrying about the past constantly as the NDP are wont to do. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Industrial Projects in Alberta’s Heartland Area Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Alberta industrial heartland bitumen upgraders present a tremendous opportunity for Edmonton and our capital region.

Jobs, investment, and growth will all flow. It’s like Fort McMurray five years ago and a bit better planned, but are we fully prepared? Regional governance has broken down. Is everyone who should be involved, and are they to the best degree? My constituents at Edmonton-Manning who will work there are very concerned. My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Will we soon see some effective regional governance mechanism in place to ensure that everyone in Edmonton’s million metro region is represented in dealing with massive growth? 1:50 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr.

Danyluk: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. One of my ministry’s mandates is to deal with the regional planning issues and the intermunicipal disputes. On March 5 I received recommenda- tions from the Minister’s Council on Municipal Sustainability that address these issues. We are currently reviewing this information, and we expect to release our response later this spring. I can assure you that we are taking action to support stronger intermunicipal co- operation in Alberta. Mr.

Backs: A supplementary to the same minister: with transporta- tion of workers and materials a key concern for many area residents, what steps has the minister taken to ensure that the various local governments, investors, and our provincial government are co- operating in this area? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, this is a critical issue. The province is working with our partners in municipal governments through the minister’s council to come up with innovative solutions to those challenges. Mr. Backs: A supplementary to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation, Mr.

Speaker: will the minister ensure that the work proceeds quickly to widen highway 28A and take out bottlenecks to ensure the safety of the residents, the schoolchildren, and the thousands of workers that will be travelling that highway to and from work? Will it be safe, and will it be ready? Mr. Ouellette: Well, Mr. Speaker, the government is working with all the municipalities in the industrial heartland area to determine all the overall transportation needs in the area. As part of this we’re working on a long-range plan for roads, bridges, and other critical infrastructure throughout the area.

The plan will identify the urgent, short-term, and long-term projects, and from there we can prioritize the projects from within the department’s construction program. As always, Mr. Speaker, safety is a very high priority of this government. It’s a primary concern. When we look at road projects, we will certainly take all the safety of the drivers, the school buses, and you know what, Mr. Speaker . . . The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Hays, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Climate Change Public Consultation Mr. Johnston: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last week the environment minister introduced the Climate Change and Emissions Management Amendment Act, 2007, that put in place emissions intensity reductions of 12 per cent for large industrial emitters of greenhouse gases. Today the same minister announced that there will be a consultation with Albertans on a new climate change plan for the future. My first question is to the Minister of Environment. Will the minister explain the rationale for this consultation? Mr. Renner: Well, Mr.

Speaker, as I previously indicated, Bill 3 really is the culmination of delivering on the climate change policy that was initiated in 2002. This government does take climate

Alberta Hansard March 14, 2007126 change very seriously, so the announcement that I made this morning is to allow us to engage in consultations that will lead us to the next step. We’ve dealt with the industrial side, the industrial emitters side. We need to very seriously engage in conversation with Albertans on where we go from here. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Johnston: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first supplemental to the same minister: what topics are Albertans going to be consulted on? Mr. Renner: Well, Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated this morning at the news conference, there are some critical issues that I as minister am interested in, not the least of which is: what is the role of govern- ment? Should the government be the leader? Should the govern- ment be the legislator? Should the government be directing, or should the government be simply educating? Up until now we’ve had largely a voluntary system in place. There are a lot of things that Albertans have been suggesting could and should happen. I’m looking forward to engaging in that conversation over the next few weeks. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

Johnston: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My second supplemental, also to the Minister of Environment: how can people in my area get involved in the consultation? Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, there will be 10 public meetings throughout the province, and I encourage all Albertans who are able to participate in those public meetings to do so. In addition to that, the fact book and workbook that was introduced this morning is available online, is available on request, and will be available at all MLA offices. I encourage Albertans again to pick up those books and fill out the workbook and submit it.

In addition, I will be meeting with aboriginal groups and other stakeholders to get their feedback, all of which will be incorporated into a revised climate change plan that we will introduce this fall. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Affordable Housing Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Since 2001 the population of this province has gone up over 10 per cent, and housing costs have as much as doubled.

The need for affordable housing is a cr itical issue for Albertans, and as the Minister for Municipal Affairs and Housing well knows, to solve the crisis takes innovation, expertise, money, and the political will to keep the issue at the top of the provincial agenda. The minister’s all-party Affordable Housing Task Force report is due to go to the minister next Monday. What will the minister do with the report once he gets it, and when will he release it to the people of Alberta? Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr.

Speaker, as the hon. member has men- tioned, yes, the housing task force will report, and hopefully it will report on March 19. We will take that recommendation, and then I will present it to our government for further direction. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Taylor: All right. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: rents are skyrocketing in this province. Will the minister push for a temporary rent regulation capping rent hikes at 10 per cent and change the law to allow only one rent increase per year? Mr. Danyluk: Mr.

Speaker, I have not seen the report, and I cannot prejudge or pre-empt what is in that report. That report will be presented to me on March 19, and at that time I will look at it. Mr. Taylor: Understood, Mr. Speaker, but I would have thought the minister would have been getting the same sorts of calls from his constituents that the rest of us are getting from ours.

Given the seriousness of the affordable housing crisis, which dictates that while we’re talking about it, we also need to get building, will the minister provide this House today some targets and timelines for some big-time creation of affordable housing sufficient to make a real difference? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, again, we established a housing task force to look at the challenges in housing in Alberta and the opportunity for that task force to provide us with recommendations that would help with some of the guidance on where this government needs to go. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore. Municipal Growth Pressures in the Capital Region Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Statistics Canada in its recent report indicates that 50 per cent of the Canadian population now resides in six municipalities, which includes the city of Edmonton. This sudden population growth and urbanization has led to ever-increasing financial strains on the city of Edmonton, which now provides social care, cultural facilities, infrastructure, and other expensive services to the entire capital region.

All of these services are funded by Edmontonians through their property taxes. To the minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing: is the minister aware of the revenue and expenditure inequity in the capital region, particu- larly with reference to the Sturgeon and Strathcona counties, which estimates that the city of Edmonton now provides some $80 million worth of services to the surrounding region? Mr. Danyluk: Mr.

Speaker, in managing growth pressures, the Minister’s Council on Municipal Sustainability has brought forward a number of recommendations to address the short- and long-term sustainable funding for all municipalities. On that committee there is representation from the AAMD and C, which represents Sturgeon. There is also representation from the city of Edmonton. A number of the recommendations for the province’s consideration address opportunities for strengthening co-ordination and intermunicipal co- operation. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Reports are great, but how will the minister actually address that inequity? Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, the municipalities face significant challenges in delivering services and infrastructure to support a growing population and economy. The Minister’s Council on Municipal Sustainability has developed a draft report which contains 12 recommendations in three key areas: intermunicipal relationships, roles and responsibilities, and municipal revenue sources.

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 127 The Speaker: The hon. member.*** Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My last supplemental to the same minister: how will the minister assure Edmontonians that the onset of development in what’s known as the industrial heartland will adequately compensate the city of Edmonton for the anticipated influx of services required? Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, I need to say that Edmonton needs to be involved in the planning with the surrounding communities.

This needs to be done, first of all, through communi- cation, collaboration, and co-operation. 2:00 Trade, Investment, and Labour Mobility Mr. Bonko: Despite his pledge to govern with openness and transparency, the Premier’s comments Monday show that he is not committed to this with respect to the trade, investment, and labour mobility agreement as it was negotiated and written and signed behind closed doors. This Chamber is only now having its say, Mr. Speaker. At best free trade agreements can benefit all involved. We have to be careful, however, that we do not restrict our ability to govern.

My questions are to the Minister of International, Intergov- ernmental and Aboriginal Relations. What labour gr oups did the government consult with when it was drafting TILMA to make sure that Alberta workers would not be disadvantaged by this agreement? Mr. Boutilier: Mr. Speaker, this agreement is a North American type of priority that is setting an example. As the Premier said the other day, the Premier of Ontario, the Premier of Saskatchewan, and other Premiers are interested. In fact, we are so open and so transparent that you can see it all on the website any time you wish.

I’ll give you the website call centre so you can view it for yourself because we are so open and transparent. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Bonko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Article 13 of TILMA states that the training standards recognized in one province will be recognized in the other. Since this agreement prohibits discrimina- tion based on provincial standards, will Alberta workers with higher levels of training and certification be disadvantaged by this agree- ment? Mr. Boutilier: Mr. Speaker, no, they will not. Mr. Bonko: Mr. Speaker, maybe referencing

article 13 wasn’t specific enough for the minister because I didn’t hear him mention it once. Let me help him.

Article 13(1) states that “any worker certified for an occupation by a regulatory authority of a Party shall be recognized as qualified to practice that occupation by the other Party.” Again, will this mean that Albertans with greater levels of qualifications will be disadvantaged by this agreement? Mr. Boutilier: Mr. Speaker, the answer is no. But let me you give you a perfect example. In other words, what the member is saying is that he doesn’t want to see ot hers be able to come from British Columbia to Alberta.

For instance, an example under the old way it used to be done under the Liberals, that they support, is that a teacher wouldn’t be able to come and teach in Alberta. Well, guess what? We want teachers in Alberta because our ec onomy is growing. The Liberals may not, but we do, and that’s why TILMA is supported. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Lougheed, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. C5 Forestry Management Plan Mr. Rodney: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In recent weeks I’ve heard a great deal of criticism from constituents and environmental groups who are very concerned with timber harvesting in the C5 area of southwestern Alberta, a part of the province enjoyed by many, many Albertans. Many are genuinely unclear regarding the government’s proposed forest management plan for the area. Could the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development clarify exactly what this plan actually entails? Dr. Morton: Mr.

Speaker, I’d like this Assembly to know that the proposed C5 forestry management plan is one of the most progres- sive developed to date in the history of this province. Because there are no other forestry management agreements in this area, our ministry had a free hand to use the highest industry standards and also do extensive public consultation in developing this plan. The result is a forestry management plan that recognizes that the key is that a healthy forest is the foundation for all other uses – for all other uses – not just forestry but watershed, habitat, biodiversity, tourism, and recreation.

C5 does that, and I want to thank publicly today the public consultation committee and my officials for devising such a good plan. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Rodney: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. My first supplemental is to the same minister. Could the minister please be clear on whether the plan allows clear-cutting in the region or if it ignores watershed issues in C5, as some individuals and groups have suggested? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Albertans should know that less than 1 per cent of the area identified in this plan will be harvested in any one given year, and when harvesting takes place, reforestation will follow immediately. The plan does not call for any massive swaths of clear-cutting. Instead, there will be contour cutting, that protects watersheds and trails and provides protection for other critical areas, and no harvesting will occur in the upper reaches of any watersheds. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Rodney: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My last question, again to the same minister: if the proposed plan is as appropriate and balanced as we are to believe, why is it that media accounts report the minister as saying that he is delaying his approval? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The answer is very simple. This is a good plan, but it could be made better. That’s what we’re going to do. The additional time, by deferring approval at this time, will allow me to receive the report of the Oldman River watershed basin committee. I expect that later this summer.

I’ve also spoken with my department officials and asked them to take a second look at the plan, asked them if we couldn’t slightly change the orientation and focus of this plan so that it dovetails with the land-use frame-

Alberta Hansard March 14, 2007128 work, the mandate that our Premier has given me to protect our public forests and areas. I’m asking them to come up with a plan where forestry isn’t just the end of the plan but the means by which we achieve other values, and that includes healthy forests, healthy watersheds, habitat for recreation and biodiversity, tourism and recreation, and a healthy and profitable and sustainable forestry industry. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview, followed by the hon. Member for St. Albert. Health Workforce Strategy Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This government continues to stumble along from one crisis to another. In health care we have severe shortages of nurses and other health workers. We have burnout, we have emergency room crunches, we have bed shortages, and we have other serious problems. The problem is going to get worse before it gets better with this overheated economy. My question is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. How long has the 2006 workplace plan been on the minister’s desk, and why has he not made that public? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I haven’t made the workforce strategy public because it hasn’t gone through the policy approval process that we have, where we undertake a careful review before our CPCs, caucus, and cabinet before we adopt a policy and before we implement the policy. I inherited a lot of work that was done by my predecessor and the good folks in the ministry. I am now in the process of collaborating with the Minister of Employment, Immigra- tion and Industry and the Minister of Advanced Education and Technology and working on the budget and resourcing figures that we can apply to it.

But in the process of doing that, of course, there is work being done on workforce strategy. The world doesn’t stop as we develop a new plan, and . . . The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: You’re going to have trouble with that, Dave. [interjections] Mr. Martin: You’re cutting off my time here. Mr. Speaker, the problem is that we have a severe crisis now. This was supposed to have been done back in the spring of 2006. Is the minister saying that this report is so damaging to the government that he has to go through another process? This was supposed to be done in the spring of 2006. Why don’t we have it now?

Mr. Hancock: Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker. Work is happening now. Nurses are being educated in our institutions. Doctors are being educated in our institutions. Personal care aides and LPNs are being educated in our instituti ons. People are out recruiting internationally for new workers to come. In many different ways we’re enhancing. We just signed a deal with the doctors and hope for ratification shortly on that, which will help retain and improve. Lots of things are happening.

The strategy that’s being developed, the workforce strategy, which is part of my mandate – and I work collaboratively with the other two ministers I mentioned – is in process. There are lots of good strategies in it in addition to what’s already being done. Mr. Martin: Mr. Speaker, Rome burns while Nero fiddles. The minister is saying that all these things are happening. Is he not recognizing that there is a crisis? All he has to do is go into the hospitals in both major cities, in Grande Prairie and others. Things are happening right now, and we still don’t have a plan. He says that some things are going.

This was supposed to be done in 2006. I’m asking the minister: why are we still struggling along without a plan? Mr. Hancock: There appears to be a severe shortage of audiologists as well, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member didn’t hear my answer. Work is progressing. The plan will be coming out shortly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for St. Albert, followed by the hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat. Student Transportation Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Calgarians do not have enough local schools to meet their needs, and now their children can’t even make it to the schools they have.

A shortage of bus drivers has left hundreds of Calgary students out in the cold every day, and the situation is reportedly getting worse. To the Minister of Education: what direct actions has the minister taken to address the issue and get Calgary students to their classrooms safely and on time? Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, no one is being left out in the cold, so let’s get that clear. The issue with school bus drivers, whether it’s rural or in Calgary or any other region of the province, is no different than the other workforce issues that we’re facing today.

It’s a question of qualified people, enough people to drive buses. The other issue that we have to deal with when it comes to school bus drivers is that a lot of these positions are part-time, and as you well know, it’s harder to get part-time folks than full-time. 2:10 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that both the Catholic and public school boards in Calgary have requested that the minister conduct a review of how the province administers transpor- tation grants, will the minister take up that challenge and do something about it? Mr.

Liepert: Well, currently we have a committee that is looking at all of the funding framework for education. It involves the school boards, including the Catholic and public school boards. I look forward to what recommendations they come forward with to put in place a funding framework that is probably more acceptable to those who receive the funds. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister admit that the current busing problem is made worse by the government’s failure to build local schools in Calgary’s new and growing commu- nities? Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I’ve made no secret of the fact, since inheriting this portfolio, that one of my priorities is going to be to get schools built where children live. We’re working on doing that because, quite honestly, children riding the bus for an hour is not enhancing their education. So we’re going to work hard to get schools where children live, and it’s going to include some alterna- tive ways of financing those schools.

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 129 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Barley Marketing Mr. Mitzel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday was the last day for Alberta farmers to mail in their votes for the federal barley plebiscite. Through this plebiscite the federal government indicated that they were consulting western Canadian farmers on their views of how they want to market their barley in the future.

I learned from my constituents that the Alberta government had placed advertise- ments in major rural newspapers, and then I heard these same ads on the radio. Considering that this was a consultation and not a binding vote, my question is to the Minister of Agriculture and Food. Why is the Alberta government spending Alberta taxpayer dollars on advertising to support the market choice option when other prov- inces either are silent or gave both sides of the issue? Mr. Groeneveld: Alberta’s marketing choice support is not new, Mr. Speaker. This has been a long-standing position based on previous votes by farmers.

We trust our farmers. Alberta farmers are entrepreneurs who want to compete in the world market. In the past 70 per cent of them have told us that they want choice. If even just 1 per cent wanted choice, they should not be denied that right solely based on the province that they happen to live in. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat. Mr. Mitzel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: as some of my constituents have so claimed, did Alberta’s ads promote the elimination of the Canadian Wheat Board? Mr. Groeneveld: No, Mr. Speaker, they do not.

In fact, every single ad encourages people to vote a competitive wheat board. Under marketing choice the Canadian Wheat Board will truly be able to show its capabilities. We feel it is very important that barley producers can and should be able to continue to support marketing through the Wheat Board if they wish. This is where marketing choice is different than the two other boxes. It’s about having the freedom to choose. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mitzel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again to the same minister: of the nearly $1 million spent on marketing choice over the last four years, can the Minister of Agriculture and Food tell me in this House if all these dollars were spent on advertising? Mr. Groeneveld: Mr. Speaker, as the member said, this money was spent over four years, and less than half of that money went into advertising, newsletters, and website development. Most of it was invested in research and studies of open-market systems like there are in other parts of the world. We’re doing our homework, and our studies are publicly available on the website. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Calgary-Varsity, followed by the hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose. Private/Public Partnerships Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. While an Alberta Liberal government would use the $7 billion third-quarter surplus revenues to both save for the future and pay off desperate infrastructure needs, this Tory government chooses to go back into debt through P3 alternative financing arrangements for our schools, roads, and hospitals. These same Tories created the current infrastructure crisis through their aversion to debt. The current Premier when minister of infrastructure presided over that policy.

My first question is to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation. Could he explain to Albertans why we now need to go back into debt to build schools, hospitals, and roads even though we have a surplus of $7 billion, $6 billion in . . . Mr. Ouellette: Well, Mr. Speaker, for people that don’t know, we’re not going back into debt. We’ve found a way to do some alternative financing, and I’ll tell you that it is a way to save taxpayers money, get the job done sooner, and allow jobs to all Albertans. That’s what we’re doing: better government for Albertans. Mr.

Chase: Yeah, and the minister has 30 years to hide out in retirement. My second question is to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation. Does last week’s government commitment to cover publicly the cost of overruns at Calgary’s much-delayed, much- needed southeast replacement hospital indicate that it has seen the Alberta Liberal light and will reject 30-year P3 debt financing for other projects? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I’m not so sure what the Alberta Liberal light means. I’m not sure there’s a light on over there. Anyway, Mr.

Speaker, we do plan on and it’s been announced that we are funding the south Calgary hospital, and it will be built as soon as possible. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Thank you. Obviously, the minister is dealing with a 25-watt bulb. My last question is to the Minist er of Education. Why is the minister suggesting that we saddle Alberta taxpayers with a 30-year debt to not only build P3 schools but maintain and operate them privately when we have the money to build them publicly and transparently now? Debt or no debt, Mr. Minister? Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr.

Speaker, first of all, as we discussed earlier, we need schools where kids live. Despite what this hon. member says, we do not have $7 billion laying around to spend on schools. There have been a number of P3 and alternative financing projects around the world that have been su ccessful, and there have been a few that have been unsuccessful. The research I did was that every time a P3 was unsuccessful, it was commenced by a Liberal or a socialist government. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Dodds-Round Hill Coal Gasification Project Mr.

Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Environment. Residents of my constituency have great concern about the environmental impacts of a large coal mine and coal gasification project being proposed by Sherritt south of Tofield and Ryley and to the northeast of Camrose. To the minister: how can residents be assured that the province will hear and address their environmental concerns before a decision on this project is made? The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Alberta Hansard March 14, 2007130 Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can assure the hon. member as well as the residents that he refers to that the review application process that Alberta Environment has includes ample opportunity for the public to voice their concerns. Even before this project can be considered for approval, the company must conduct an environmental impact assessment and submit that to Alberta Environment.

This impact will outline all of the potential environ- mental impacts from the project, and then Alberta Environment will consider the EIA, environmental impact assessment, as well as any statements of concerns from the public before making a decision on this project. Mr. Johnson: To the same minister: what processes can Alberta Environment commit to to ensure that there is a clear understanding of the water quality and quantity impacts of the proposed project? 2:20 Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, all activities involving water require either a licence or approval from Alberta Environment.

We only issue water licences and approvals when we are confident that the quantity and qua lity of water will not be impacted by the develop- ment. We also consider the impacts of the development on other licensed water users. So all potential water impacts will be outlined in the project’s environmental impact assessment and will be reviewed by Alberta Environment employees. Mr. Johnson: My last question is to the Minister of Energy. What role does Alberta’s Energy and Utilities Board play in reviewing and approving this project? Mr. Knight: Well, Mr.

Speaker, certainly this government in place in Alberta today has a plan, and we’re on track to build a stronger Alberta. The gasification of coal may just be one step ahead in our plan. The EUB will play a role with respect to permitting. This particular project is in the very early stages at this present time, and an application has yet to be filed. When it is filed, the EUB will take into consideration all of the assessments and the EIA that has been mentioned already by my colleague, and certainly a determination will be made at that point. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar.

Temporary Foreign Workers (continued) Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Temporary foreign workers here in Alberta are victims of very weak labour laws that are not enforced by this government. This government has no interest in enforcing the laws for temporary foreign workers. An Hon. Member: That’s not true. Mr. MacDonald: Of course it’s true. Earlier in question period today the minister of municipal affairs indicated that temporary foreign workers have the same rights as other workers in the province. My first question is to the hon. minister.

Why, then, is Armando Garcia working on a corporate farm in eastern Alberta and getting no overtime pay after he puts in his 40 hours a week? This man has worked 189 hours overtime in three months and has not received one extra penny for his efforts. Why is that happening? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, as I said previously, this is an individual case, and I will forward that information to the minister in charge, and we will look into it. Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister: why is this gentleman from Guadalajara, Mr.

Armando Garcia, not being covered by WCB when he’s working on that big corporate farm? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, it is no different than any other farm worker in Alberta. We will take it under advisement. Mr. MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, this time to the minister of agricul- ture. This government has a hotline called the Alberta foreign worker hotline. It’s a toll-free number within Alberta, which really could read 1-877-LETS-EXPLOIT.

This web page is not providing information to farm workers who are on temporary work visas or any other worker on a temporary work visa on what rights they have in this province if they’re not satisfied with the job conditions. Will this website start showing workers’ rights and where they can go to have those rights enforced? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Groeneveld: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Of course, the foreign worker program and temporary foreign workers are federal issues that we work under with the other, so I’m sure that the answer to the question would come through them.

However, we are very con- cerned, and we are very appreciative that we do have the temporary foreign worker program for agriculture. It’s something that is greatly needed by agriculture, as it is in most of the rest of the country. We’re more than happy to work through the federal program and also with the Employment, Immigration and Industry minister on it. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Deerfoot Trail Maintenance Mr. Cao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The province has helped out the city of Calgary a great deal by taking over the maintenance of the Deerfoot Trail.

Given the tremendous growth in Calgary, the Deerfoot Trail carries millions of vehicles a year. My question today is to the hon. Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation. What maintenance has been done on the Deerfoot Trail lately? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, again, I’d like to reiterate that this government takes safety – and maintenance is part of that – very seriously. The Alberta government has invested over $200 million to improve Deerfoot Trail since the government took it over in 2000. This year the government will invest a further $17 million for various Deerfoot Trail projects.

As for routine maintenance, our maintenance contractor does a very good job of removing snow, filling cracks, when you consider how much traffic is actually on that road at all times. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Reflecting questions from my constituents about the lighting outage for about a month on the Deerfoot Trail

section now known as the Calf Robe Bridge overpass, my only supplemental question to the same minister: when will the lighting be fixed for Calgarians so that we can drive safely at night to that

section of the Deerfoot Trail? Mr. Ouellette: Again, Mr. Speaker, safety is a high priority for this government. The Alberta government has a separate maintenance contract with Enmax for overhead lighting on the Deerfoot Trail. In

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 131 January Enmax started a maintenance blitz and has been out on the road working when weather and traffic have permitted them to be there. So far, Enmax has replaced or repaired approximately 300 lights, and the contractor is committed to continuing the blitz for as long as it takes. We’re also working on better co-ordination, to put all of our contracts together in one to make sure that everyone can be there when needed.

The Speaker: Before we move to the next part of the Routine, just so hon. members will be brought up to date, on day 2 of the session we had 84 questions and answers, on day 3 we had 88, yesterday we had 78, and today we had 100. That’s not a record, by the way. head: Introduction of Bills (reversion) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Nose Hill. Bill 19 Appeal Procedures Statutes Amendment Act, 2007 Dr. Brown: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce Bill 19, the Appeal Procedures Statutes Amendment Act, 2007.

The legislation is intended to modify the current appeal process of the Court of Appeal in hearing appeals from boards or tribunals, and the bill includes minor amendments to eight provincial statutes overall. The amendments are designed to reduce delays and make better use of the court’s time. [Motion carried; Bill 19 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would move that Bill 19 be moved onto the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] The Speaker: The hon. President of the Treasury Board.

Bill 20 Appropriation (Supplementary Supply) Act, 2007 Mr. Snelgrove: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce Bill 20, the Appropriation (Supplementary Supply) Act, 2007. This being a money bill, Hi s Honour the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor, having been informed of the contents of this bill, recommends the same to the Assembly. [Motion carried; Bill 20 read a first time] head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to table on behalf of the leader of the NDP opposition two documents.

The first is the result of a corporate registries search that shows the voting share- holders of the Holy Cross Manor. The second is a list of candidates for the PCAA executive committee elections from the PC Party’s website. The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today, as promised earlier, to table media reports from the Drumheller Mail indicating that the number one story in ’06 was the Red Deer River water diversion and quoting this: “During his election campaign, Ed Stelmach was quoted as saying the plan was ‘ridiculous’.” Thank you. 2:30 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings today. The first one is a letter that I wrote to the now hon. Premier. This letter is dated October 19, 2006.

I am asking how the government would plan to get us out of the economic mess caused by electricity deregulation, and I haven’t received a response to this letter yet. My second tabling is in regard to my questions earlier in question period, and it is a document from Public Accounts, year end of March 31, 2005, indicating that for Cliff Paulgaard, who is a principal owner of the corporate farm C.G. Paulgaard Farms Ltd., there was a grant in that year of $63,400. That was the year 2005. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’d like to table five copies of the employment contract of Armando Garcia, and there’s a bill that the hospital wanted him to pay – go to a bank and buy a money order and pay it – and also the pay stubs. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Orders of the Day head: Committee of Supply [Mr. Marz in the chair] The Chair: I’d like to call the Committee of Supply to order. I would call the President of the Treasury Board to move the esti- mates. head: Interim Supply Estimates 2007-08 Offices of the Legislative Assembly and Government Mr. Snelgrove: Mr.

Chairman, I would like to move the interim supply estimates, and I would like to add to their introduction that these amounts have been derived from the estimates made by their departments and their spending requirements for this period. The amounts reflect the pattern of government spending being higher in the early months than in some of the later months of the year. This pattern occurs because some payments are due April 1 and July 1 for the first and second quarters, and many a nnual payments fall due April 1.

These payments result from the quarterly and annual spending commitments in all areas of government, responsibilities such as health, education, children’s services, and support for seniors. In addition, some payments are related to the seasonal nature of certain types of activities such as construction and agriculture. Spending in many of these areas of government responsibility is subject to a broad range of cost pressures. These interim supply estimates provide funding authorization only until the main government estimates are approved.

Approval of interim supply estimates pending the release and approval of the budget is not unusual for government. This authorization is needed so that hospitals, schools, universities, and so on can continue to

Alberta Hansard March 14, 2007132 function as usual. Consequently, these interim supply estimates cannot reveal the government’s spending plans until all the budget documents are tabled. Those budget documents will include comprehensive budget information in the form of the government’s fiscal and business plans, the ministry business plans, and the government estimates. These estimates will be fully debated when the budget documents are tabled. Thank you.

The Chair: Hon. members, before I recognize the first speaker, having received no clarification on which order goes first, we will follow the same format as outlined by the Deputy Chair of Commit- tees yesterday. I’ll recognize the hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford first. Mr. R. Miller: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It’s my pleasure to rise in response to the request for interim supply from the President of the Treasury Board. My first thought upon hearing the president’s comments was that I’ve heard that speech before, and indeed I have.

I’m going to suspect it’s probably a script that the government uses every year when they find themselves in a situation where we don’t have a budget come the end of the current fiscal year. So you’ll have to excuse me if my comments sound familiar as well because even though I don’t have a script in front of me as the President of the Treasury Board did, I’m going to guess that I’m going to reiterate similar comme nts that I’ve made in the past whenever the government has come looking for interim supply. It’s probably the most frustrating exercise for a member of the opposition: to discuss interim s upply.

If I can draw a parallel, it would be like my 15-year-old daughter coming to me and saying: “Dad, I need a thousand dollars. Oh, and I’ll tell you next week what I’m going to do with it.” [interjection] The President of the Treasury Board just told me that his daughter does that. I’ve had that experience, and I’m going to guess several members have. Certainly many taxpayers in Alberta have had that experience.

I’m going to suggest that for most of us, probably the vast, vast majority of us when that happens, the answer is either (a) “No way” or (b) “Not until you tell me exactly what you’re going to do with it.” So we’ve got a situation here where the government is now asking for nearly $10 billion, and they’re saying: “Don’t worry about it. Trust us. We’ll tell you in a month and a few days what we’re going to do with it.” I know it’s a fait accompli. I know it has to happen.

I understand that there are certain requirements at the beginning of the year that make it mandatory to have a little more money than might be expected if you were to ration it out over the year. I understand all of those things. As I say, we’ve been here before.

But I hope that the President of the Treasury Board and government members in general understand how frustrating an exercise it is for those of us on this side of the House when we’re expected to approve nearly $10 billion without anything more than a single line item in the docu- ment that they’ve presented and absolutely no explanation as to where that money might be used or what it might not be used for. So I just hope that everybody in this House will recognize the difficult position that this puts members of the opposition in when we are asked to have this debate today and tomorrow.

Now, the President of the Treasury Board did reference the fact that there are certain obligations that are seasonal and certain obligations that are front-end loaded, as it were. But I just note that three years ago we were in a similar situation, and Bill 24, which was at that time the interim suppl y act, asked for $5.5 billi on, and three years later we are asking for nearly double the amount. Although, as I say, I recognize some of these peculiarities that exist in terms of front-end loading and seasonal expenditures, I don’t believe that we’ve had a hundred per cent inflation in the last three years.

So that would be a question. I’m wondering: if three years ago $5.5 billion was sufficient for the government to get through until the time that a budget was passed, why is it that here in 2007 we’re looking at nearly double the amount being requested by the government? I’d also like to opine, I suppose, about the need for a long-term savings plan. I know that the President of the Treasury Board and the Finance minister have both talked about having a surplus plan or some sort of a surplus allocation plan in the budget that we’re going to see on the 19th of April. That, as you will know, Mr.

Chairman, isn’t good enough for the Official Opposition. We have argued and presented a bill in this House, which, unfortunately, not even one single Conservative member voted in favour of, that would have established a nonrenewable resource savings plan which would have seen 30 per cent of all revenues from nonrenewable resources put into savings. That, unfortunately, was not successful even in passing second reading in this House, which is really too bad because it would have been great to at least have had the debate.

However, we have no idea from this whether or not that might actually be part of it, and in fact we don’t even know if there’s a surplus plan involved with this because, as the minister outlined, they’re not able to give us anything more than a single line item on each of these points. 2:40 The new government has talked an awful lot about openness and transparency. This is not an idea that springs from the new Premier. In fact, this is an idea that the Official Opposition has been calling for for a long time: more openness and transparency in government. Mr.

Chairman, I would submit to you that it’s just one more in a long stream of great ideas that have been generated by the Official Opposition caucus that this government has chosen to adopt. And you know what? More power to them. If that is our role for the time being as we serve in opposition, to supply great policy initiatives to the government and have them adopt them, that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

The sustainability f und, which the government is mandated to keep 2 and a half billion in and currently sits at somewhere in excess of $6 billion, was actually the initiative of a former Leader of the Official Opposition, Dr. Ken Nicol from Lethbridge. Of course, once the government adopted it, it changed names from a stability fund to a sustainability fund. Nevertheless, it was an idea of the Official Opposition that the government saw merit in and chose to adopt.

So, as I say, if openness and transparency is sort of one of the new buzzwords or one of the five planks of the new government, we’re certainly going to hold their feet to the fire because it was something that we’ve been talking about for a long, long time. Mr. Chairman, as I say, I’ve expressed a great deal of frustration with the fact that we don’t have dollars tied to actual programs here.

One of the things that concerns me – and I know my colleague from Lethbridge-East will speak to this later on, when she has the opportunity to come up – is whether or not there will be funding in this $10 billion that we’re debating today for the long-term care committee’s recommendations. As we know, the government has put some money towards those recommendations: far, far short of the $250 million that that panel called for.

In the meantime the situation has become absolutely desperate in terms of long-term care and their needs, particularly as it revolves around the labour shortages and the difficulties that care facilities are having attracting workers but many, many other issues, many of which have been spoken about and, as I say, a number of which I know the Member for Lethbridge-East will reference later today.

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 133 Mr. Chairman, there was an awful lot of concern expressed in my constituency recently about the need for an overpass to be built at 23rd Avenue and Calgary Trail. I’m hopeful that there may actually be some money in this $10 billion that would go to the city of Edmonton to help them get that done. We’ll find out, I suppose, in five weeks or so whether or not that’s the case.

This is a huge issue for not just the constituents of Edmonton- Rutherford but, frankly, for anybody who comes into Edmonton on the Queen Elizabeth highway or anybody who’s hoping to leave Edmonton or, for that matter, anybody who’s even doing business or commuting, visiting family members, whatever the case may be in south Edmonton. The problems created right now, particularly at 23rd Avenue with the South Edmonton Common development and now the Century Place development that’s taking place, are huge.

I would hope that there may be some relief here for the city of Edmonton so that they could proceed with that very worthwhile and very much needed development. Another issue that is of particular concern to the residents of Edmonton-Rutherford, Mr. Chairman, would be the extension of the LRT project to the Century Place development: again, the sooner the better. I know that right now there is funding to move that project forward, and I know that it is actually going to happen.

But as an example, we had a situation here just recently where the parents, teachers, and students at both Harry Ainlay high sc hool and Louis St. Laurent high school were hoping to have at the minimum an underpass or an overpass over 111th Street, if not an actual station put in at that location, to prevent serious accidents and injuries taking place, and that is not going to happen due to budgetary concerns.

Again, I would hope that there may be some money in here that would address that situation and perhaps allow for an extra station or a safe crossing for students and users of those schools at 111th Street, but I’m not sure. Whether or not I get an answer from the minister on that, I don’t know, but again certainly that is something that the constituents of south Edmonton are hopeful of and would dearly love to see. Now, there are a number of departments, Mr. Chairman, that I would like to point out in particular.

I suppose that we’ll start with the Legislative Assembly and an interim supply of $19.8 million being asked for to carry on the operations of this Assembly. I’m going to guess that some of that might actually be to make sure that myself and my colleagues in the room today get paid after April 1, so that would be a good thing. I know that, like most Albertans, the members of this Assembly depend on their paycheques, so I’m not so sure that I would disagree with the idea that we support the Legislative Assembly.

Whether or not $20 million is required to get us through to mid-June or so, when the full budget will be passed, I don’t know. Once again, other than to say expenses and equipment, there’s no explanation as to what exactly that money might be used for. I’m going to point out in particular the departments that I am the shadow minister for, and I’ll allow my colleagues to then do the same for theirs: $33 million for the Department of Finance, Mr.

Chairman, again for expense and equipment/inventory purchases, with no explanation as to what that might be, and another $15 million for nonbudgetary disbursements, an awful lot of money again being asked for without any real explanation as to why or how it might be used. Probably even more important, I would think, are the requests for funding for Service Alberta and the Treasury Board. Service Alberta is looking for $98 million for expense and equipment/inventory purchases, and Treasury Board $6.4 million. The reason I say more important, Mr.

Chairman, is because as the President of the Treasury Board would acknowledge, these are new departments. Given that they’re new departments, I think it would be fair to say that there’s still some shakedown taking place in terms of what exactly each department is responsible for, the shuffling that has taken place back and forth in terms of who’s responsible for what. We’re asked to give in excess of a hundred million dollars to these two new departments, without any explanation at all as to how that money is being used. We don’t even know, quite frankly, Mr.

Chairman, how many full-time employees might be employed by each of those depart- ments. We don’t know exactly what programs and services they’re funding out of this hundred million dollars that they’re asking for in interim supply. As I say, b ecause it’s a brand new department, there’s no history that we can look at. We can’t look at that department and say: well, last year they spent – you know, I’ll just pick a number – $500 million, so it would be fair to give them $100 million in interim supply. We can’t do that because it’s a brand new department.

So in particular I would look to the President of the Treasury Board for a little more explanation in terms of why Service Alberta needs $98 million and exactly how that money might be spent over the next couple of months while we’re waiting for a budget to be passed and, likewise, exactly how $6.4 million is going to be used to fund the operations of the Treasury Board over the next couple of months. Again, Mr. Chairman, because we do not have any historical data to go by. We don’t know how many employees are there, and we don’t know what their plans might be in terms of running programs.

I think that requires a little more detail than just the single line item that we’re given here. With those comments, I’m going to take my seat and allow others to ask some questions. I would hope that the President of the Treasury Board might be able to answer some of those for me today, and if not, I would hope that we can hear some sort of a response prior to being asked to vote on interim supply amounts tomorrow afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Chair: The hon. Minister of Service Alberta and President of the Treasury Board. 2:50 Mr. Snelgrove: Thank you.

I don’t think that it will come as a surprise to the hon. member that I think this process of interim supply needs to end, and I have to give a lot of credit to the House leaders and to our new Premier, who said: let’s start setting a date for a budget to be brought in. So from that point of view, I abso- lutely agree. I think we use a lot of time in here – I agree – but I think the hon. member would understand why it has to be done in this way to preserve the integrity of the budget. You know, history sometimes gives us rules we live by that are necessary.

The idea that this is bigger than normal: while I give the House leaders credit for our new change, I also have to point out that we could still be here in July if we want to debate that budget long enough. That’s right. July, Dave. [interjections] I could have just been saying some other name. I didn’t mean him. Yes, the process needs to change. Bringing in a budget on February 22, having the full debate before this time will be abso- lutely light years ahead for all: for you, for us, for our departments. It means maybe moving up our work in the fall as we develop it, and that’s fine.

That’s what we’re paid to do. But pass that. To try and speculate what might be in the budget or what might not be wouldn’t really be fair. As you can probably appreciate, there are very separate issues here with the Minister of Finance and the President

Alberta Hansard March 14, 2007134 of the Treasury Board. The budget projection is solely the purview of the Minister of Finance, and we would not want to prejudge or even to speculate what might be in there from the department. So I take the hon. member’s comments, and we will have a broad discussion when the budget is brought down. I think his points around the process are right on. The Chair: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I also thank the Treasury Board minister for his indication that things will improve. I look forward to those improvements.

We saw an improvement today in the House. Through a more transparent, accountable procedure we were able to get through a hundred questions, so we’re moving in the right direction. I appreciate the President of the Treasury Board indicating that things will get better. We have to deal with what we currently have, though, and that’s what I’ll discuss. We all remember that we had barely a week in terms of a fall Legislature. It basically went into the tail end of August and, I believe, a little bit into September. Had we had a fall sitting, possibly there would have been greater preparation potential of transfer.

We would all have been in the House, and this work could have been done. As it was, with the retirement of our former Premier a leadership race was called. That leadership race took up a certain am ount of time, and we’re basically trying to catch up for that lost time. Normally the House would have sat around the 21st of February, or usually just after Family Day. We find ourselves continually playing catch-up.

We won’t hear what the actual budget figures are until April 19, and obviously we can’t have the legislative process and Albertans come to a grinding halt because there is no money to cover their programs. In terms of improvements that I would like to see made, I frequently get the idea that there are almost two blue books: one for the opposition members that is a very thin version and then another book of a different colour that the government has that actually provides the details behind the millions and billions of dollars that are being called for in interim supply.

Again, I want to echo what the Member for Edmonton-Rutherford pointed out. We have one- line items, and we have no idea what constitutes billions of dollars of justification for a one-line item, and to debate or discuss or approve with any understanding or basis of knowledge is absolutely impossible. Possibly at some point in the future – trust us – will be something through the joint policy committees, et cetera, that we’re moving toward which will be easier, but we’re still, unfortunately, stuck in that old circumstance where information is power, and without information you’re, to a great degree, powerless.

To go through the budget, we have support to the Legislative Assembly, expense and equipment/inventory purchases of $19,800,000. If I understand this correctly, this is to get us toward the middle of April, and then I gather that some of that money will be spent later on, and we’ll get a little bit more qualification for it. Again, I’m not sure, and I’d look forward to the minister explaining to me where $19 million goes between now and April 19 in support to the Legislative Assembly. For example, is that part of our constituency budget? All these questions I would appreciate having answered.

Office of the Auditor General: $6,200,000 for expense and equipment/inventory purchases. Again, I very much value the office of the Auditor General, and I also feel very privileged to be on the Public Accounts Committee, to which the Auditor General reports on a weekly basis when the Legislature is sitting. Now, thanks to the wonderful arrangements of our House leaders, we will be able to meet outside of the Legislature.

Again thanks to our House leaders we will have a budget for research, and we will not just be restricted to having the ministers and their aides come before us, but we can look beyond, to a variety of health regions and school boards. We have almost unlimited possibilities as to who we can call before us to account. So I think that helping out the Auditor General is a great expense. In Public Accounts this morning the Auditor General asked us to consider prior to next week if we would benefit from a double reporting.

In other words, instead of the great large reporting process that we receive at the end of the year, he’s indicating his willingness to provide us with tw o reports. I think that this is absolutely wonderful in terms of the accountability and that the Auditor General obviously needs that extra financial support, particularly if he’s going to put out two annual reports instead of the current voluminous, large one, that is very inclusive and conclusive. Now, we have the office of the Ombudsman receiving $800,000. Again, the Ombudsman is a very busy person in this province.

There are a number of complaints that are brought to the Ombuds- man because of concerns over how they were treated, whether they received their AISH payments, whether the AISH payments were sufficient, whether a person on long-term disability was suddenly cut off and forced to go prematurely onto the Canada pension plan, whether a person has been mistreated; for example, if they were promised that their 15 or 14 and a half years of service for the federal government in the military would be guaranteed as part of their pensionable service and for their participation within the provincial government’s auspices.

That Ombudsman is a very, very busy individual, and this money, this $800,000, is probably well spent. The office of the Chief Electoral Officer is asking for an increase or a temporary holdover of $2,100,000. Now, among the expense and equipment/inventory that the Chief Electoral Officer is purchas- ing, I would like to think that possibly it’s cameras so that we could have photo identification for all voters who come up on voting day. Although they may be of a homeless nature, they can say: “Well, I’m at the Calgary Drop-In Centre,” or “I’m at the Mustard Seed.

This is who I am.” Possibly they don’t have the money to afford a vehicle, and therefore they’re not likely to have a driver’s licence.

Potentially the office of the Chief Electoral Officer could use some of this $2 million to ensure that every single Albertan has the opportunity, should they wish, to have secure photo identification, that will allow them to then participate fully without a doubt as to their identity during the election process. 3:00 This is something for the health minister – I’m very pleased to see his attendance today – to consider because the health card could be a secure card in terms of identification with a picture, and that would eliminate the production of numerous copies of health cards, which have been in circulation far beyond our population yet are used as a piece of iden tity.

So this could very well be a direction that the Chief Electoral Officer might consider. We know in Calgary, for example, the problems we had with ward 10. One of our members opposite knows very much the difficulties. I won’t name that individual out of respect. The office of the Ethics Commissioner. Now, again, the Ethics Commissioner is a very busy man. I know that both the NDP opposition and the Liberal opposition keep him hopping in asking him to inquire as to the appointments of individuals onto numerous patronage-style committees, so the Ethics Commissioner is indeed a busy man.

Whether it’s the royalties task force, whether it’s a

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 135 health board appointment, there are a lot of individuals whose ethical background and research and potential conflicts of interest need to be considered. If $200,000 is sufficient for the Ethics Commissioner to carry out a full review of conflict of interest, then I don’t have a whole lot of difficulty with that amount. The office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. Now, here’s an area that I worry about.

If the Information and Privacy Commissioner is being granted $1,600,000, then why do we opposition Liberals, opposition NDP, our independent, and our member of the Alliance have to pay prohibitive amounts in FOIP requests to get information that is readily available to government members? When we’re talking open and transparent, let’s look at FOIP costs, that are similar to those of the federal government. FOIP has become a burial instrument. It doesn’t protect the rights of individu- als.

It looks like potentially the government spent $1,600,000 for a big shovel to bury information rather than making it available, so I question that particular expenditure, but again I would like to hear more detail. So to this point the total expend itures that I have just related to you on six departments is up to $30,700,000. Now we come to Advanced Education and Technology with the former minister here present. I know how hard he worked as the former minister of advanced education, and I very much appreciate the work that he did.

I might also indicate that without purchasing a Conservative membership, I supported and indicated to others my support for him as the potential new Conservative Premier. It didn’t work out that way, but I am pleased to see that he arrived safe and sound back in a front-bench position because I do see him as a man of integrity. As I have mentioned before, I credit him along with our House leader and the hon. NDP House leader for coming up with a progressive change in Standing Orders and regulations. However, within the advanced education $728 million I would love to know how that breaks down.

For example, what portion would Bow Valley College get? What portion would Mount Royal College get? How about the Alberta College of Art and Design, the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology, and, of course, the area that I represent proudly, and that is the University of Calgary? Now, Harvey Weingarten, the pr esident of the University of Calgary, felt the need to borro w 1 and a half billion dollars to expand the University of Calgary’s campus and programs so that we could be a world-class institution. The expansion is proceeding at a rather slow pace, I must admit.

I’m up at the university on a regular basis, and I’ve yet to see footings, for example, for the digital library, which is going to benefit all Alberta. But if the president of the University of Calgary had received some of this money that he has been requesting for some time, he possibly wouldn’t have had to put the University of Calgary at the financial risk of borrowing 1 and a half billion dollars. I’m sure that there are members – and I don’t want to get into Lethbridge. I’ll leave that to my confident and competent colleague from Lethbridge-East. I’m sure she’ll have questions.

But I cannot think of too many better investments of money than postsecondary, whether it’s for trade training, whether it’s for academic pursuits, whether it’s just the general improvement and understanding, arts and humanities, culture. This money could potentially be extremely well spent, but I have no idea from this line item, that indicates that $728,800,000 has been expended on equipment and inventory purchases and an additional $27,900,000 has been spent on nonbudgetary disbursements. I consider myself an educated man, but I have no idea what nonbudgetary disbursement items might include.

Under Agriculture and Food, expense and equipment: $205 million. Well, that’s probably in line as an expense. Alberta’s third most important industry in terms of the money that it returns to the province or that it brings in would be agriculture. In fact, I guess, agriculture and forestry are similar in importance. We know that their sort of economic produce pales in comparison to oil and gas, but their practices are considerably less impactful on our environ- ment. Now, hopefully in Agriculture and Food there is no more expenditure.

There is no more money that is going to suggest that the Canadian Wheat Board should get out of the business. I know previously somewhere from the government expenditures that almost a million and a half dollars went to discourage our current system, a system that seems to be extremely well supported in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. If a free-vote opportunity was provided without having to have an identifying number at the end of your ballot, I think more Albertans would feel that the status quo is the way to go.

And those few entrepreneurial types who want to make money at the other operators’ expense: we would see them for what they were. The time they spent in jail: well, that’s an indica- tion. This government seems to want to do away with co-operatives, and that’s what the Wheat Board in fact is. 3:10 Children’s Services: $311 million, expense and equipment. I can’t think of a better area to expend money on than Children’s Services. We have a new minister, and I appreciate the fact that she is quickly getting onto that job.

I guess that maybe if I look at the $11 million of the $311 million, that’s approximately how much, I believe, was given to child care service providers to increase accreditation, subsidize spaces. Again, b ecause the minister is here, she can probably provide a little bit more detail on the money that was expended on Children’s Services. However, this province is the only province that doesn’t provide funding for child care past age six.

In other words, this government assumes that once a child is in the school system, if they’re capable of being in the school system, automatically all of their care concerns are over. Well, as a schoolteacher of 34 years I want to point out that schools are more than babysitting services. While we do care for children within the fac ility, we also educate them. We also help them to develop concerns of citizenship. We work on their cultural and artistic abilities. We do more than care for them.

What is not happening in this province and what is necessary is that child care provisions, both private and public, are increased. I had a very interesting conversation with a lady by the name of Bev Smith. Bev Smith is an extremely strong advocate for stay-at-home parents. I look forward to a second opportunity if such provides. The Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Thanks, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate an opportunity to speak on the interim supply estimates.

I would like to focus my comments in regard to education specifically, and I do have a number of questions if the hon. minister would be so kind as to enlighten myself and whoever else might be interested. These interim supply estimates in regard to education seem to represent somewhere between 20 and 25 per cent of the total operating budget for the ministry. I wanted to make particular note that the estimates have been allocated for what is said to be expenses and equipment/inventory purchases, and it seems to be quite a significant increase over last year’s numbers.

Of course, these mostly represent one-off sorts of purchases for

Alberta Hansard March 14, 2007136 the ministry for things like furn ishings, display cabinets, and equipment such as lab equipment and whatnot. But, you know, my concern for this long-term expenditure and the whole issue of obsolescence and wear and tear on equipment is that I’m wondering if these are expenses rolled into the core operating budget of the ministry.

Again, I would ask if we could expect sustained and guaranteed funding in the long term for such expenses because what we’ve seen happen in the last 10 to 15 years in public education is that, espe- cially with school-based funding, schools have had to make decisions about letting those things go for a longer period of time since they have to focus on making sure that there’s a teacher in front of the class and some books; you know, very immediate basics to look after.

Those other items such as furniture and whatnot, that have a longer obsolescence period, have been neglected, so what we’re seeing now is lots and lots of schools with some long-term equipment requiring some financial assistance for replacement. Thus, I believe and I think schools would believe that that belongs in part of the regular budget. Put it back, basically, something that’s been in short supply over this last long period of time, since at least 1993.

It is, in fact, a strategic priority of the Education ministry to address schools’ infrastructure needs, so I would like to ask a number of questions in that regard as well. For one, how in fact can this government continue its co mmitment to address infrastructure when, for example, our own public school system here in Edmonton states a need for 13 new schools and the ministry is committed to eight? I see a basic discrepancy there that certainly cuts short Edmonton public’s capacity to replace older schools and to build into new areas.

Again, sort of a way by which shortages are being planned here, and it just creates more stress on other parts of the budget. You know, given that the 2004- 2005 budget identified approxi- mately 530 schools nearing the end of their life cycle in this province, requiring an additional expenditure for renewal or for replacements, how much of this money will be needed to ensure that even minimum standards are maintained in schools throughout the province?

I think we have still a real discrepancy between what the reality is for long-term infrastructure investment and what our budgetary allocations are here, and I would like to see that addressed in this coming budget, as would thousands of students and teachers and parents across the province.

I am starting to hear more substantively that the answer the minister is looking towards in this government is using public/- private partnerships to meet this shortfall, and I guess, obviously, we have a number of serious concerns in regard to using the P3 model for schools and for public infrastructure construction in general.

I think the issue was in fact brought up here today – and it’s a very valid one – that we are simply deferring the cost and taking it off an annual budget when we use P3s, but we are really applying that cost over a much longer period of time, whatever the contract is for, and for at least a 10 to 30 per cent increase from what the public construction of any given structure would be, not to mention other subsidiary bills that come from a private/public partnership.

You know, this is a basic financial problem, but I believe that, particu- larly when applied to public schools, it has specific education issues and problems as well that need to be addressed or considered very clearly when we’re talking about using P3s to build schools. For example, back in 1999 Calgary’s the Hamptons elementary school was built using the P3 model. Six months after it was built, the school developed cracks in its tiles and drywall, roof leaks, faulty heating and mechanical systems, and $120,000 was needed to bring the school up to an acceptable standard.

So I ask whether or not that is, in fact, value for our money, number one, and number two, is that a reasonable expectation for the safety and comfort and health of students and teachers working in a school like that built through the P3 model? Since this risk management mode l is such a big issue within P3 projects, I ask: who is going to manage the risk to safety of our children and of workers in these P3 schools and take responsibility before we end up with a substandard school being built, as we saw with the Hamptons elementary school project P3 experiment?

You know, once you commit to the bricks and mortar of however you happen to build something, a school in particular, and you find it coming up deficient, it causes a tremendous amount of instability in regard to the educational needs of students and a loss of public monies from school boards. I would venture to say that the risks outweigh the benefits by a long shot in regard to using the P3 model to build public schools in the province of Alberta. 3:20 Also in regard to the Education budget, then, I just wanted to address briefly the staff, specifi cally librarian, shortfall in the province of Alberta.

The ministry has a business plan that states that it supports the healthy development of Alberta children and youth. Those are their priorities 6 through 9 in the business plan, yet once again I see that, in fact, the number of full-time equivalents, FTEs, for librarians has dropped from 81.7 FTEs to 12.1 FTEs in the last decade while high school counsellor FTEs have dropped from 99.1 FTEs to 43.8.

I would beg to ask this question: how can we ensure, as it’s sometimes put in this House and as I certainly would aspire to, the best education system in the world when critical components to our children’s education and intellectual development are not just lagging but, in fact, dropping precipitously? I would ask what the minister would like to do to rectify this decade-long free fall in regard to staffing levels in the key areas of librarians and counsel- lors. I think that this is particularly noteworthy.

You know, in relation to this as well, although the government and the ministry specifically commissioned the Learning Commission to gather up a very interesting and worthwhile report, the key recom- mendation of the Learning Commission was to reduce the class size average across the province. In so many school divisions we’re not seeing a drop in class sizes and student-teacher ratios, but in fact we’re seeing increases, especially in the higher grades. There’s a certain point where students’ education quality drops significantly with the size of the class.

I know from personal experience that certainly anything that exceeds 30 students per class has a genuine and immediate impact in lowering the capacity for the students to achieve, and this is a very common number that is used as a standard throughout high schools around the province. You know, I think we have to take a hard look at these things. If we do in fact want to not just build but maintain a high-quality public education system over the long term, it really does live or die in the quality that we provide to the classroom on the ground level.

While we do have lots to be proud of in terms of our public educa- tion system, there are several places where we must change and focus the way that we do things. The number one statistic, Mr. Chairman, that comes to my mind is in regard to high school completion rates. We have an embarrassingly low high school completion rate in the province of Alberta. This doesn’t bode well just for now but for our long-term future as well because, you know, that really limits the capacity for our students to become gainfully employed and independent, not just now but throughout their lives.

These completion rates must increase. They must be brought up to at least the Canadian average level immediately to determine that we will

March 14, 2007 Alberta Hansard 137 stay competitive and looking after the full needs of our public here in the province over the near and long-term future. Finally, before I finish off, I just wanted to speak about the First Nation and Métis

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20070314
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L26 S3 20070314 1300 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0ab3ebc922a674fff7d6ac25567faad928a72a6c

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