Alberta Hansard — 5 November 2007, Afternoon sitting (13:00) (Legislature 26, Session 3)

20071105

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

November 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1779 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Monday, November 5, 2007 1:00 p.m. Date: 07/11/05 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Welcome back. Let us pray. As we begin our de liberations in this sitting of the Legislature, we ask for the insigh t we need to do our work to the benefit of our province and its people and to the benefit of our country. Amen. Hon. members, I’m now going to invite Mr. Paul Lorieau to lead us in the singing of our national anthem, and I’d invite all present to join in, as well, in the language of one’s choice. Hon.

Members: O Canada, our home and native land! True patriot love in all thy sons command. With glowing hearts we see thee rise, The True North strong and free! From far and wide, O Canada, We stand on guard for thee. God keep our land glorious and free! O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. The Speaker: Please be seated. Presentation to the Assembly of Mr. Jack Hayden Member for Drumheller-Stettler The Speaker: I would now invite the hon. the Premier to proceed to the bar of the Chamber.

Hon. members, I have received from the Chief Electoral Officer of Alberta a report of the returning officer for the constituency of Drumheller-Stettler containing the results of the by-election conducted on June 12, 2007, which states that a by-election was conducted in the constituency of Drumheller-Stettler and that Jack Hayden was duly elected as the Member for Drumheller-Stettler. [Preceded by the Sergeant-at-Arms, Mr. Stelmach escorted Mr. Hayden to the Mace] Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present to you Mr.

Jack Hayden, the Member for Drumheller-Stettler, who has taken the oath as a member of this House, has inscribed the roll, and now claims the right to take his place in the House. The Speaker: Let the hon. member take his seat. [applause] Presentation to the Assembly of Mr. Craig Cheffins Member for Calgary-Elbow The Speaker: I would now invite the hon. Leader of Her Majesty’s Official Opposition to proceed to the bar of the Chamber.

Hon. members, I have received from the Chief Electoral Officer of Alberta the report of the returning officer for the constituency of Calgary-Elbow containing the results of the by-election conducted on June 12, 2007, which states that a by-election was conducted in the constituency of Calgary-Elbow and that Craig Cheffins was duly elected as the Member for Calgary-Elbow. [Preceded by the Sergeant-at-Arms, Dr. Taft escorted Mr. Cheffins to the Mace] Dr. Taft: Mr.

Speaker, I have the honour to present to you Craig Cheffins, the new Member for Calgary-Elbow, who has taken the oath as a member of this House, has inscribed the roll, and now claims his right to take a seat. The Speaker: Let the hon. member take his seat. [applause] head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Employment, Immigration and Industry. Ms Evans: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a real thrill today to introduce a former resident of Sherwood Park now living in Texas, whose father was media personality Ernie Poscente.

His mother, Pat, is a person who has been active as a community volunteer and is well known as a marriage commissioner. Vince Poscente has a BA in recreation administration. He moved to Calgary and became the director of Alberta Luge, assisting the Calgary Olympic Development Association. In the ’88 Olympic Winter Games he was one of four Canadian delegates selected to the International Olympic Academy in Greece. He actually undertook to become an Olympic athlete and with no previous experience learned to ski race. He represented Canada in the ’92 Olympic Winter Games in Albertville, France.

Most recently, however, besides all of his expertise as an athlete he earned a master’s degree in organizational management and has written a book, The Age of Speed. He’s an inductee to the Speakers Hall of Fame with the likes of Ronald Reagan, Art Linkletter, and Og Mandino. I’d ask you to join me in welcoming a man who lives in Texas but whose heart is in Alberta. Vince Poscente, please rise and receive the welcome of the House. The Speaker: The Associate Minister for Capital Planning and Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of the House a constituent, Mr. Ran jit Dhanoa, who is visiting the Alberta Legislature for his first time. He is seated in the members’ gallery, and he’s accompanied by Sukhi Randhawa from that area. I’d ask Sukhi to rise as well, and perhaps the Chamber could receive them on this special occasion. Thank you for coming. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark. Mr. Tougas: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly a group of 49 visitors from Aldergrove elementary school in my constituency. They are joined by teachers Mrs. Sandra Col quhoun and Mrs. Christine Steil; parent helpers Doug Parnham, Dana Hamilton, Kathy McDonald, Glennis Rideout, Christine Barringham, Pamela Young, and Cora Nicholson. I’d ask that they please rise and receive the traditional warm greeting of this Assembly. 1:10 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It’s a pleasure to rise and introduce to you and through you to all hon. Members of this Legislative Assembly a visiting group from the Suzuki charter school in the Ottewell neighbourhood in the constitu- ency of Edmonton-Gold Bar. The total number of visitors in the group today is 21. The group is led by t eacher Miss Bauernhuber.

Alberta Hansard November 5, 20071780 She is accompanied by two of the parent volunteers from that fine school, Mrs. Colette Grant and Mrs. Alison Schneider. The group is located in the public gallery, and I would now ask them to rise and receive the warm traditional welcome of this Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have two groups to introduce today. I’d like to introduce, first of all, to you and members of the Assembly 21 keen students from the Belvedere elementary school. They are accompanied by teachers Mrs.

Janice Bogner and Miss Nicole Moores, who’s a student teacher. They’re in the public gallery. I’d ask them to stand and receive the tradi- tional warm welcome of the Assembly. Mr. Speaker, I’d also like to introduce to you and to members of the Assembly 40 energetic students from Belmont elementary school. They are accompanied by teachers Mrs. Gerke and Mrs. McKeen and parents and helpers Mrs. Hay and Mrs. Kruger. I would ask them also to stand and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m proud to stand before this Assembly and introduce to you and through you to all members of this Legislature Janine Halbesma, the senior policy analyst for the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. I’m pleased and honoured that Janine is here today in support of Bill 213, the Regulatory Accountability and Transparency Act. Also, with her to support Bill 213 is Walter Hrach, a businessman and community activist from north Edmonton. They are in the members’ gallery, and I’d ask them to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Dr. B.

Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am very pleased to introduce to you and through you to all members five of our fine, fine research and administrative staff in the Liberal caucus. They are new members Michael Decore, Kristen McFaden, Marta Rzechowka, Derek Volker, and Amanda Krumins. They are seated in the gallery along with our chief of staff, Judy Wilson. I’d invite them to stand and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Foothills. Mr. Webber: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Looking up in the gallery here, I see a familiar face, a lady by the name of Kathy Watson, who is with the Alberta Home Builders’ Association. She also served as a member of the Affordable Housing Task Force. I’d like you to please welcome Ms Kathy Watson to the Assembly. Thank you. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Red Deer-North. Family Violence and Bullying Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. November is Family Violence Prevention Month in Alberta.

Family violence surrounds us in our communities, affecting men and women of all ages, socioeconomic backgrounds, sexual orientation, and ethnicities. Children are negatively impacted by family violence regardless of whether they are the direct target of abuse or witnesses to it. The government of Alberta has taken action. Nine partnering ministries are working together and investing a combined total budget of $46 million to prevent and respond to family violence through the implementation of Alberta’s prevention of family violence and bullying initiative.

This year we provided an additional $2.6 million to help communities provide services to victims of family violence and bullying, including additional support to women’s shelters and sexual assault centres, for a total investment of $23 million. We also launched a provincial safe visitation initiative earlier this year, and we continue to support community actions aimed at preventing family violence and bullying. Along with our many community partners we have worked just as hard at preventing family violence as we have in responding to it.

In fact, this morning our government launched the second year of the family violence public awareness and education campaign, which encourages Albertans to help individuals that are impacted by family violence. I encourage anyone who wants to know how they can make a difference to visit the family violence website at familyviolence.gov.ab.ca. Mr. Speaker, putting an end to family violence requires a strong and collaborative approach from government, our communities, and our citizens. There are many ambitious goals that have been set for Albertans, like ending homelessness in 10 years.

We can set another goal to end family violence, but it will take the whole community working together to help others. Together we can end the silence and stop the violence. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-West. University of Lethbridge Mr. Dunford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This year has been a very, very good year not only for the city of Lethbridge but for the postsecondary institutions that make up part of our community. Today I’d like to make special note of the University of Lethbridge, which is celebrating their 40th an niversary.

This institution is incredibly blessed with the administration and faculty that they have, the tremendous appeal that they have toward students from all across Alberta and right throughout Canada but, of course, especially southern Alberta. I believe that – I should be close – approximately 25 per cent of the student body actually comes from the city of Calgary.

We’re a great opportunity for Calgarians to offer their young children an opportunity to attend a first-rate university situation away from home, which is important to many young people – it certainly was to me – and, of course, also a very safe commu- nity. There has been tremendous growth at that university, now something over 8,000 students. Because of that, the government of Alberta has been assisting them in their capital plan.

Just recently announcements were made not only regarding renovation money for the University Hall but also, of course, capital going in to a life science and management centre and then just recently a top-up of the water centre. This water centre, by the way, is going to be world class for water in a semiarid environment like we’re in. It’ll be great for Alberta. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Canadian Centre for Unmanned Vehicle Systems Mr. Mitzel: Mr.

Speaker, it’s my pleasure today to rise to talk about a $3 million funding announcement which was made last week in Medicine Hat for the Canadian Centre for Unmanned Vehicle

November 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1781 Systems. Funding will be provided through the rural Alberta development fund, which encourages innovation, collaboration, and growth across rural Alberta. The Canadian centre for unmanned vehicles will create limitless opportunities for this type of technolog- ical industry in Alberta. The centre is a national and international hub for the development, testing, evaluation, and commercialization of unmanned vehicle systems.

Company partners already include such entities as DRDC, which is Defence Research and Development Canada, and MacDon- ald, Dettwiler, who built the Canadarm for NASA. Research and development and testing will occur for unmanned air vehicles, unmanned ground vehicles, and unmanned underwater and surface vehicles. Mr. Speaker, their vision is to reach across Canada to promote and bring focus to research and development and, as well, the commer- cialization of the UVS technology.

The centre will bring together existing technology clusters such as university, government, and industry interests throughout Alberta with regard to aerial, marine, and land UVS applications. Three million dollars from the Alberta government in rural development funding will help kick-start this viable international business in Medicine Hat for southern Alberta and for all Albertans as emerging cutting-edge technology brings worldwide recognition to the centre. Mr.

Speaker, I’d like to thank the RADF for recognizing this project as a project that will develop a phenomenal industry in not only rural Alberta but all of Alberta. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. 1:20 Children in Care Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The week that ends in Remembrance Day is a time to ask what matters in our lives. Some things that preoccupy us, such as oil royalties, will matter very little 50 years from now unless we convert the income from that source into things that do.

Family values is one thing we say does matter; however, it is not uppermost in the day-to-day. This past week another child died tragically in the province’s care in a foster home we commissioned to provide for those in critical need. I believe we cannot in good conscience say that we support families unless we support them for all. The continued death of children in Alberta’s care is unacceptable in a human society. These loses are not inevitable. A hundred and fifty years ago children died regularly working in conditions accepted as normal that we would not accept for a moment.

These c onditions did not just go away. Politicians resolved that those conditions would end and made it so. I appeal to the hon. Premier to include the elimination of deaths in Alberta foster care in his objectives. This is an attainable goal if we increase the investment and attention given our social services. It is also a matter of faith and value. In a province that claims to be built in that tradition, Mr. Speaker , let us put our money where we say our values are: in building a child-friendly society. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Stewardship of Energy Resources Dr. B.

Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The basic assumption of the whole debate on royalties is that Albertans own their resources. The Auditor General states it concisely. “Albertans own a world- scale hydrocarbon resource.” Unfortunately, ownership, especially private-property ownership, too often means the licence to exploit. Aboriginal people remind us that the land and its natural resources are a gift. Ownership is a foreign concept to them, and of course it’s obvious that we did not in any way create the huge deposits of oil and gas beneath the land.

The authentic response to receiving the land as a gift is thanksgiving, and the basic value which emerges from thanksgiving is stewardship. Stewardship is deeply rooted in our western civilization and in the Christian tradition. As a preacher for 30 years in Alberta I delivered many sermons on the theme of stewardship. What is worth remark- ing is that this word “stewardship” has continued to have profound meaning in the wider secular society. In the circles of business and industry and especially in the context of our natural resources the word “stewardship” is often used.

We have received the land as a gift, and the issue is whether we are good stewards of the resources we have received. The Auditor General choose his words carefully and correctly when he wrote that indeed “Albertans own a world-scale hydrocar- bon resource,” and that it is the government and the Ministry of Energy which have “final responsibility for the stewardship of Alberta’s oil, gas, and oil sands resources.” But instead of steward- ship the government has demonstrated a continuing history of mismanagement and the squandering of our resources.

Albertans are now faced with one of the most important choices in Albertan history. The Progressive Conservative government of Alberta has forfeited its right to act as stewards of the resources we own. This government should be replaced by responsible stewards whose values and vision and long-term plan will truly honour and respect the gift of our bountiful land and the resources we own. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Anthony Henday Drive Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’d like to take this opportunity to pass a thank you to the Legislative Assembly of Alberta and particularly the Premier of Alberta for fast-tracking and putting in pl ace the third quarter of Ant hony Henday. Earlier this summer our minister of infrastructure, under the leadership of our Premier, announced the construction of the northwest

section of Anthony Henday. [some applause] Thank you. I cannot express enough how important this particular stretch of ring road is to my constituents of Edmonton-Castle Downs. As you know, Mr. Speaker, with the P3 model which is being implemented at this construction, this entire

section of the Anthony Henday will be built in one piece. It will be built as a free-flow highway with no traffic lights and no intersections, allowing for the already congested area of northwest Edmonton to have their traffic moving freely. Mr. Speaker, more importantly, this project will link the capital region in the way that it is meant to be linked, and St. Albert residents will have free access to northwest Edmonton and other parts of Edmonton.

But what makes this project even better is the fact that it has a 30-year warranty – how often do we hear about a 30-year warranty on a highway? – which means that in 30 years residents of Castle Downs will receive the highway in the shape that it was built on day one of its utilization. That is a great deal for residents of Castle Downs. So, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all residents of Castle Downs, thank you to all members for supporting this project. We are looking forward to driving on this brand new stretch of road by fall 2011. Thank you. head: Presenting Petitions The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m tabling 230 more petitions on the following:

Alberta Hansard November 5, 20071782 We, the undersigned residents of Alberta, hereby petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to: 1. Ensure that the remuneration paid to employees working with people with disabilities is standardized across the sector, regardless of [where they work]; 2. Ensure these employees are fairly compensated and that their wages remain competitive with other sectors . . . 3. Improve employees’ access to professional development opportunities (training and upgrading); and 4. Introduce province-wide service and outcomes-focused level- of-care standards.

Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne. Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in this Assembly today to table a petition that’s been signed by 18 residents of Whitecourt-Ste. Anne. The petition urges the Assembly to pass Bill 45, the Smoke-free Places (Tobacco Reduction) Amendment Act, 2007. Thank you, sir. head: Notices of Motions The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre has advised me, but she has no notice of motion. You want to rise on a point of privilege later. This is Notices of Motions here. Ms Blakeman: Yes. The Speaker: We’ll recognize that.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you. The Speaker: But I do have a notice of motion from the hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of my leader and pursuant to Standing Order 30,

be it resolved that the ordinary business of the Legislative Assembly be adjourned to discuss a matter of urgent public importance; namely, the failure of the government to promptly introduce and pass royalty legislation to prevent the loss of billions of dollars to the public treasury as oil prices rise dramatically. head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m very pleased to rise and present a document from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business which supports Bill 213, the Regulatory Accountability and Transparency Act, often known as the red tape act. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I’m tabling a letter from my constituent, Ms Elaine Hyshka, in which she expresses deep concern with Bill 46, that’s before the Assembly. She goes into detail,

section by

section of the bill, on what she finds objection- able in that the government is now restricting public input and placing the energy industry in a privileged position relative to ordinary landowners and citizens. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Two tablings today, both from constituents. The first from Tina Danecke, who is noting that her rent has increased by $305 a month. Needless to say, her salary has seen no increase.

She notes that she’s just a working schmo living paycheque to paycheque and believes she’s being gouged because of greed and that nothing was done by the government to assist her. The second tabling, also from a constituent, from Sarah Jackson, noting that herself, the majority of college and university students, and many Edmontonians want legally binding air quality laws and would love to see Edmonton set the Canadian standard for great air quality and low emissions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mrs.

Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a letter from a constituent, Mr. Neil Evans. He said that he would like to comment on the Royalty Review Panel and tell us that he supports and agrees with its recommendations: “My opin ion is that changes in the royalty structure and policy are long overdue, and that Albertans have been shortchanged by the generous royalty policies of previous governments.” The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. 1:30 Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings today. The first is from RKS Research and Consulting.

It indicates that when asked to identify the states operating the most successful deregulated energy markets, the response was none. The second tabling I have is a press release dated June 20, 2007, from the Official Opposition of the province of Alberta, and this press release is regarding Bill 46, which w ill restrict Albertans’ democratic rights. Thank you. The Speaker: Hon. members, we’ll return to the remainder of the Routine at the conclusion of question period. head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: Today it is my pleasure to invite the hon.

Leader of the Official Opposition to commence the fall session question period. Royalty Revenues Dr. Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker, and it’s my pleasure to respond. Secrecy and incompetence continue to be trademarks of this government. The current and former ministers of Energy claim Albertans have been receiving their fair share of billions of dollars in royalties. This has proven to be false. Yet they continue to figure prominently as front-row ministers in this government’s cabinet. My question is to the Premier. What does it take before ministers are fired under this Premier’s leadership?

November 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1783 Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I see Dr. Doom is back from vacation. Mr. Speaker, I promised Albertans a very fair share of the development of the resources they own, and we have delivered on that commitment. Our royalty framework is fair to the owners of the resource, which are all Albertans, and it also finds the correct balance, providing the certainty and predictability for the continued investment that’s necessary to develop the resources. We have found the balance, and I am certain that the policy is g ood for all Albertans. Dr. Taft: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the Premier’s word is no longer good enough. Albertans do not trust this government. To the Minister of Energy: given that the minister has vigorously defended the old royalty regime knowing full well – full well – that it was shortchanging the citizens of this province billions of dollars, will the minister do the honourable thing and resign? Mr. Knight: Well, Mr. Speaker, the short answer would be no.

However, I can indicate to the House and to all Albertans that, in fact, if you attach the 20 billion plus dollars that have been invested in capital deployment across this province year after year after year for the last five years, if you include the 8-plus billion dollars invested in the Wood Buffalo region year after year after year, if you include the jobs, jobs, jobs that Albertans received from the policies of this government, we are on the right path. Dr.

Taft: Despite seven years of gross financial mismanagement and incompetence on the part of three consecutive Energy ministers, the Premier refuses to do the right thing and clean up this mess. Why? Why does the Premier allow these ministers to remain in his cabinet? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, in the period of time that the member is talking about, we’ve eliminated, paid off, $22 billion worth of debt. We now have the highest employment rate in Canada. For the last – what? – three decades we have had the lowest income taxes.

We also have the highest per capita income of any Canadian right here in Alberta, plus at least 500,000 new Albertans voting with their feet, moving to this province because our policies are correct. They also create new opportunities for their children and their grandchil- dren right here in the province of Alberta. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you. Mr. Speaker, for the past seven years this government has assured Albertans that they were receiving a fair share of royalties. They should have known better.

Albertans were losing billions. The Auditor General states that the minister’s technical review staff “held the view that Alberta has not been collecting its appropriate share since 2000.” My question is to the Premier. The department staff has known the truth for seven years. Surely the cabinet did. Surely the Premier was at the cabinet table. How long has the Premier known that Albertans have not been getting their fair share? How long have you known? Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, this whole question about: where has the investment gone, whatever is being raised by the Liberals . . . [interjections] I always give the opposition the opportunity to ask a question uninterrupted. I would hope that they would find the decency someplace there to reward me with the same behaviour, be reciprocal. Maybe now they’ll be quiet. Mr. Speaker, since being appointed Premier, I immediately asked for a review of the royalty framework to make sure that it’s keeping up with the times. We’ve seen increasing prices, especially in oil.

We’ve seen changes in world politics that made our resources more valuable. That was the most appropriate time to do the royalty review, and we did. Dr. Taft: I’ll repeat my question. Maybe we’ll get an answer this time. The government staff have known the truth for seven years. Surely the cabinet was briefed. The Premier was at the cabinet table. How long has the Premier known that Albertans were not getting their fair share in royalties? How long? One year? Two years? Three years? Seven years? Answer. Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, with respect to this whole question of fair share, when I look at – and this will come out in the next quarterly report – Crown lease sales, the highest ever, look at corporate tax revenue paid in this province, personal income tax, again much larger than projected, and given the fact that we have for-hire signs everywhere in this province of Alberta, that tells me that the money was reinvested in Alberta for not only developing the resources, but it also created opportunity for many other Albertans and gave them a much better quality of life in terms of health care and education right here in the province.

Dr. Taft: Well, Mr. Speaker, this is a straightforward question, but it is of fundamental importance, and the Premier is evading it. How long has the Premier known that the current royalty system was shortchanging the people of Alberta billions of dollars? When were you first informed? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is making an assumption. All I’m saying is that the current policies of the government over the last number of years have been very good for the province of Alberta. We’ve seen tremendous growth. We’re on the world stage as the province of Alberta in terms of a good place to invest.

Again, we have the lowest per capita taxes, income taxes. We also have a good return on the investments. We have $70 billion in investments. We’re the engine of prosperity for all of Canada right here in the province of Alberta. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The oil and gas don’t belong to this party that’s govern ing or to this government. This government are trustees for the people of Alberta, who are the owners of this oil and gas.

As trustees they owe an explanation to the citizens, so I will once more repeat my question to the Premier, who seems so determined to evade an answer. Mr. Premier, how long have you known that the people of Alberta were being short- changed with the current royalty system? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I’m glad that the hon. member has finally come to the realization that the resources of this province are owned by all Albertans.

It’s also put in place the policies we have today to support the next generation and the generation after that, and that is why the new dollars coming from the royalty framework will be invested. One-third of that will go, of course, into savings, whether it be endowments, whether it be the heritage savings trust fund. The balance of that will be invested in infrastructure and the maintenance of that infrastructure so that the next generation doesn’t have to reach deep in their pocket to pay for the maintenance of all the new infrastructure we’re building in the province of Alberta.

Alberta Hansard November 5, 20071784 1:40 Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, this is a question of profound importance. I am asking it on behalf of the citizens of this province. How long has this Premier known that th e current royalty system was shortchanging the people billions of dollars a year? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member is making an assumption. When I look at this province, I can’t see where this province of Alberta was shortchanged when you look at the quality of life that we enjoy, the excellent health care.

In fact, we’re attracting to Alberta the world’s best physicians, some of the best research people to the province of Alberta because they see hope and they see opportunity. We’re going to make sure that the new policies, the new framework continue with the kind of openness, predictability, and certainty that investors need to bring more money and more investment to the province of Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’ve seen a demonstration here of evasiveness seldom seen in this Assembly. My question is again to the Premier.

Why does the Premier feel it so necessary to evade answering a very straightforward question? Mr. Stelmach: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member across is talking about or he’s trying to make the assumption that there are missing billions. Well, there are. There are missing billions: $22 billion of missing debt. That’s missing. That’s gone. That’s paid off. Billions of dollars invested in infrastructure, in fact the most aggressive investment in public in frastructure ever in the province of Alberta, $18 billion over three years.

We see the best quality of life here in the province of Alberta compared to anyone in the country of Canada, yet they seem to be the doomsayers of tomorrow. I don’t know where they’re coming from, but I’m looking to the future, not only for our children but for our grandchildren. That’s what they can’t see. The Speaker: The hon. leader of the third party. Ministerial Accountability Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Three years ago the NDP said that Albertans we re not getting a fair share from royalties. The Liberals failed to support higher royalties while the Tories claimed the sky would fall.

The Liberals will plead igno- rance, but the Minister of Energy cannot. His department told him Albertans should be earning up to $2 billion more in royalties every year, and he covered it up. My question is to the Premier. When will you fire that Energy minister for this massive betrayal? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, obviously the two leaders must have been – I don’t know – recessing together here or something like that and drawing up their own questions. Mr. Speaker, going right back to where we were before, this is a wonderful province to live in.

The billions of dollars that they’re making remarks on are invested in the province of Alberta. We’ve paid off the debt. We have $70 billion set aside in savings to invest. In fact, we also have a stabilization fund set aside to cushion this province from huge revenue differences because of oil and gas or any other revenue streams that may change in the province. There is no better place in Canada than right here in the province of Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. When will the Premier get out of his lame message box and answer a very, very clear question?

Now, the Auditor General said th at this minister had access to information showing that royalties could be raised without hurting the industry, and he denied it in this House. How can you condone that, Mr. Premier? Why don’t you do the right thing and fire that minister? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General has issued a report. We have accepted that report. But before the Auditor General issued the report, made it public, I had called for a royalty review very early after being sworn in as Premier. It took time to do the review. The panel looked at so many different pieces of information.

It’s quite a very complex issue, obviously. We’ve received that report, we looked at it, and we made our decisions. Those decisions are good. They’re good for the future because these are depleting resources, and we have to make sure that we find the balance but also keep some of that money aside for the next generations because that’s important. Once the oil and gas is sold, it’ll never come back. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, the minister had knowledge that you could have raised royalties years ago and earned billions of dollars without hurting the industry.

He did not tell Albertans that, and by evading the question, you are condoning that behaviour. Why is that minister still in your cabinet, Mr. Premier? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, again, they’re making an assumption based on, you know, what he said – I don’t know – three years ago or something like that. They’ ll never be satisfied as the ND opposition. If there’s still any life left in the economy, they’ll keep taxing it. They’ll tax it to its d eath, and once it dies, they’ll subsi- dize it. The policy we have is good, it’s sound, and it’s going to carry this province well into the next century.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. New Royalty Framework Mr. Hinman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We need to change from tax and spend to: let’s have some integrity. Alberta has developed a reputation for respecting the rule of law and keeping its agree- ments. We have been able to attract billions of necessary dollars for the development of our oil sands. The problem, though, is that the Premier has given his word to Albertans that he is going to rip up those contracts.

From the New Royalty Framework, page 10, it says “in the event that agreement cannot be reached, the government will take other measures.” Will the Premier be open and honest with Albertans and tell us what those measures are? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member makes reference to this government tearing up agreements. We’re not tearing up any agreements. Those agreements were renegotiated many, many times, many times at the request of oil and gas companies as prices changed over the years.

That’s dating way back, I believe, to the ’60s, so there’s good evidence as to how many times these agree- ments were open. We said that we’re going to sit down and discuss the new royalty framework with the two companies. We’re continuing to do that. It’s in the best interests of their shareholders

November 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1785 between the two companies, the government of Alberta, and future generations to reach an agreement, and I’m confident we will. Mr. Hinman: What a bunch of political propaganda. Mr. Speaker, the Premier says that he’s a man of his word. He has promised to be open and honest, but evidence has not shown that. He will not reveal his donation list, he has already increased the size of his cabinet, and he broke his promise that he wouldn’t have a TV address or infomercial.

Will the Premier and this government come to its senses, though, and reverse its decision to break the signed agreements with Syncrude and Suncor? Mr. Stelmach: Obviously, he never heard the first answer. We’re not tearing up any agreements. We’re entering into discussions with the two companies, and we’ll continue to do that. I also said that once those discussions have been completed, then we’ll bring that information to all Albertans, ju st like we did with the royalty framework report. As soon as the government received it, we made it public.

The reason we made it public is that the resources are owned by all Albertans. That report went to the owners of the resources, and they had the opportunity to review it. Everyone – the company, the government, the opposition – had time to look at it. Again, we’re not tearing up any agreements. That is a false statement. Mr. Hinman: Mr. Speaker, they’ve said many times that they’re going to rip up the agreement, and they said: we’d rather them take the carrot instead of the stick. I mean, how much more blatant can it be? This government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

The question I’d like to ask the Premier: does he really think that the government can do better with $1.4 billion than the economy and the economic spinoff that we’d receive by leaving it there? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, talking about being honourable and a person of integrity, I would ask that member to withdraw those statements with respect to tearing up agreements. The government is not tearing up any agreements. I make that very clear in the House, and he made those comments again and again. There’s nothing ever, anyplace, where it says that the government is tearing up any agreements. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon. Member for Drumheller-Stettler. Royalty Revenues (continued) Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The incompetence of this Progressive Conservative government in general and the Minister of Energy in particular is evident. This Progressive Conservative government, an incompetent government, allowed a government agency to use undercover spies to snoop and eavesdrop on unsuspecting, innocent, rural landowners.

This incompetent Progressive Conservative government allowed billions of dollars in royalty revenue to go uncollected for years, when they knew Albertans were being shortchanged. This incompetent Progressive Conservative government drafted Bill 46, which is an assault on Alberta’s democratic rights. My first question is to the Premier. Why did this incompetent Progressive Conservative government hire and protect incompetent ministers but fire and reject . . . 1:50 The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, not having heard all of the question, if that’s the way the behaviour of this House is going to take place in terms of that kind of language, I would assume that – you know, we have people in the galleries that watch. This is the highest court of the land. I hardly ever see anybody delivering evidence to the highest court of the land in that kind of manner. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. If the Premier won’t answer, perhaps the Minister of Energy will try. My next question.

According to the Auditor General’s annual report from 2006-07, which I’m sure he has read by now, there’s a quote here that “for a significant portion of 2006, the Production Audit Group consisted of only one auditor.” Given that in that year we collected over $9 billion in resource revenue, how can this minister assure this House and the resource owners in Alberta that we collected every penny that was due us when we only had one production auditor? Mr. Knight: Well, Mr.

Speaker, indeed, the Auditor General’s report was very interesting reading, and I do have to say that I’ve supported the report and continue to support the report. In fact, with respect to the audits we take it very seriously, and his comments around the capability of audit we are dealing with. We have stated publicly that we will continue to work with the Auditor General in the aspect of dealing with volumetric audits. As you would know, the volumetric system that we employ in the province of Alberta is a highly technical computerized system.

It doesn’t take thousands of minions running around to sample everybody’s production. We receive the information in bulk. We receive the information in an IT system. It’s all computerized, and it’s checked on very regularly. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For the Minister of Energy to call good, hard-working people in the EUB and good, hard-working people in the Department of Energy minions is wrong. Now, my next question is to the Premier.

The departmental review staff at the Department of Energy – and I don’t consider them to be minions – assure us that they held the view that Alberta has not been collecting its appropriate share of royalties since the year 2000. How can the Premier not admit that we have not collected our fair share in royalties and that this incompetent government has squan- dered billions of dollars in lost royalties? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the same question over and over again. Again, the billions of dollars of investment that came to Alberta at a time when oil was around $18, $19 a barrel grew this economy.

It paid for a lot of the programs that we enjoy in health and education, in social services, and in taking care of children in our province. Billions of dollars went into infr astructure, and it kept our taxes at the lowest rate compared to other provinces. Also, the kind of certainty and predictability and investment that’s necessary to grow this province will continue under this new royalty framework. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Drumheller-Stettler. Alberta Farm Recovery Plan Mr. Hayden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The rising Canadian dollar continues to put increased economic strain on Alberta’s producers, who already have to deal with rising input costs. My question is to the Minister of Agriculture and Food. What is the Alberta govern- ment doing to support its producers during these difficult times?

Alberta Hansard November 5, 20071786 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Groeneveld: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We understand that the producers in Alberta are going through some very difficult times with the rising Canadian dollar and the skyrocketing price of fuel, feed, and fertilizer. That’s why on October 16 this year we an- nounced the new Alberta farm recovery plan, $165 million in short- term assistance that will directly benefit producers being hit by these rising costs. But this isn’t the answer. Rather, the plan is a tempo- rary bridge towards the development of long-term sustainable solutions.

Our expectation is that over our support industry will be able to develop their own long-term transformation plans. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Hayden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My only supplemental is to the same minister. How will this plan work, and when can produc- ers expect these supports? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Groeneveld: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good questions from an MLA well connected to agriculture, and I appreciate them. Producers who are already enrolled in last year’s CAIS program will have their entitlements calculated automatically.

Those who did not participate in CAIS last year must submit the 2006 application prior to December 1. Producers can expect payments, Mr. Speaker, to begin this month. Priority processing will be given to those key industries that have been devastated by these economic trends. Any producers who would like to know more about the plan can phone the CAIS call centre or their local CAIS field analyst. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Bow. Provincial Fiscal Policies Mr. R. Miller: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

As we’ve heard today, both the royalty review and the Auditor General have indicated that at least $6 billion has not been collected by this government, the biggest financial scandal in Canadian history. Not only has this government allowed money to slip through its fingers, but the only plan they have for the future is to hope for surprise surpluses. How can this governme nt continue to fail Albertans by not implementing a proper savings plan for substantive investments in the heritage savings trust fund? I’ll ask the question to either the Deputy Premier or the President of the Treasury Board. Mr.

Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, I can tell you where there would have been billions of dollars gone if Albertans ever – perish the thought – elect a group whose sole purpose here is to drain as much money out of business and people as they can and spend it on the list of things they’ve got. If you want to talk about missing billions, that would be the gang that can’t shoot straight right there. The Premier ordered us, Mr. Speaker, from our unallocated surpluses: one-third into savings, two-thirds into deferred capital and maintenance.

We continue to bu ild the infrastructure for all the Albertans coming here to share the wealth yet look to the future in a responsible manner with our medical research, our heritage savings trust fund. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. R. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. According to the govern- ment’s very own projections, the revenue that this province is going to receive from oil and gas will significantly – significantly – decrease in a very short time. Those are your own numbers. Even with the new royalty rates implemented, this province is still going to be facing some very serious problems.

We’re living in a time when we need to be saving every penny, not losing $6 billion. How does Mr. Please Don’t Call This a Compromise and his gang of merry men plan on dealing with this projected decline in oil and gas revenue? We’re facing a serious problem here. Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, the very strategic reinvestment money created from our oil industry in Alberta has developed not only probably one of the best health care systems but allowed us to reinvest in an advanced education system that is second to none. We have research people coming here.

We have identified how important it is to have a diversified economy. The increase in corporate income tax, giving the low rates, the increase in personal income tax when they’ve paid the lowest percentage of personal income tax: all of these are for a well thought out, well-planned, long-term financial stability for this province. Mr. R. Miller: Mr. Speaker, Albertans want to know if they’re going to cut programs, if they’re go ing to raise taxes, or if they’re going to do both. That’s really what we’re trying to get at with these questions.

Over 30 per cent of Alberta’s revenue is coming from a source that is not going to last forever: oil and gas. Stakeholders across the board, including some in the galleries today, are project- ing deficit budgets or increased taxes if the correct trend of spending and lack of saving continue. This is a serious, serious problem. Now I’m hearing that the ministers are asking for anywhere from 7 to 30 per cent increases in their own budget deliberations. An Hon. Member: That’s the Liberals. Mr. R. Miller: That’s you guys. So the question is: how do you respond, Mr.

President of the Treasury Board, to the possibility of a deficit budget in the next few years? 2:00 Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, what an appropriate time, then, to develop a new royalty framework that addresses the long-term goals of Albertans, that lets us share in the wealth from our oil sands, which are truly Alberta’s next wealth generator. We are aware that the conventional supplies of oil and gas are diminishing.

In that light, the Premier has set forward a new royalty structure that will enhance and increase Albertans’ capabilities to tackle anything that may come at them with the exception of, possibly, a Liberal government. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Bow, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. New Royalty Framework (continued) Ms DeLong: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Alberta’s new royalty framework proposes many changes to the way we calculate and charge royalties.

Some might say that sweeping changes have been proposed, more so than at any time in Alberta’s history with the oil and gas industry. My question is to the Minister of Energy. What are the steps to be followed to implement Alberta’s new royalty framework?

November 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1787 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. First, I must indicate that this is very important policy, perhaps the most important policy that’s been developed in the province of Alberta for some time. This policy is supporting a royalty framework for the future, and it requires some legislation and regulatory amendments plus a large amount of work on IT programming and perhaps even hardware upgrades to continue to implement the program.

The implementa- tion requires work with producers, requires work with regulators, and requires work with the government to continue our Premier’s commitment to build a stronger Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms DeLong: Thank you very much. The second and final question, then, to the same minister: does he have a time frame for all of this? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. As we have indicated in our response to the report, the time frame that we have is approximately 14 months.

We are determined that our new royalty structure would be implemented and in place in January 2009. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Boy, wouldn’t it be nice if people got 14 months’ or two years’ notice of a rent increase? Affordable Housing Mr. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, had the Conservatives actually collected the missing billions and had they managed the money wisely, we wouldn’t be in the midst of an affordable housing crisis, but they didn’t, and we are.

In Fort McMurray rents are through the roof and climbing. To afford to pay the rent on an average two-bedroom unit in Fort McMurray now takes a salary of $78,000 a year. To the President of the Treasury Board and Minister of Service Alberta: will he institute a temporary rent cap now or, failing that, explain to us when he thinks the market is actually going to solve this? Mr. Snelgrove: He’s probably right on one point, Mr.

Speaker, that if they had been in power and taken all the money they wanted out of the economy, we probably wouldn’t have a rent crisis; we would probably have a Saskatchewan crisis, where we need people moving back. Mr. Speaker, rent is a service and in many ways is a contract between someone wanting a place to live and someone offering that.

Never before in recorded history has it worked when governments got involved in rent controls, price controls, when it actually worked to the benefit of the people it was trying to help, especially in a city like Fort McMurray, where it is so difficult to get a chance to do repairs on a building to modernize it because they simply can’t move out. It’s been 24/7, and that is a discussion that’s a contractual agreement between an employee and someone providing the rent. Mr. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, what a shemozzle they’ve made of this. In Lethbridge the crisis is growing worse by the week.

I’ve heard on good authority that there could be as many as three affordable housing construction initiatives that should have been under way by now that aren’t, that kind of fell into a black hole when the province handed the file to the cities and sent everybody back to Go, or maybe it was stop because nobody seems to be going forward; you’re just kind of chasing your tails on this one. To the Associate Minister of Affordable Housing and Urban Development: does she have the proper roles and responsibilities in place for this, and if so, can she explain why not very much building is getting done yet?

The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually, there’s been significant building throughout the province. This member knows that recently it was a nnounced, in March of this year, through the Affordable Housing Task Force report: $285 million toward affordable housing, toward homelessness. This year alone 196 million of those dollars were for affordable housing. That is the beginning of a plan to develop 11,000 units over the next five years. So we are working. We’re working hard, Mr. Speaker, and we will ensure that people are housed through affordable housing. Mr. Taylor: Mr.

Speaker, this is not rocket science. Humans have been building places to live since they crawled out of the cave. We know how to do this. We also know – this hon. member knows – that in the last three months 75 new secondary suites across the province have been approved for development, 75 only. You know, the Conservatives’ recent announcement of a secretar- iat on housing and homelessness was nothing more than another plan to develop another plan.

I can tell you that if it takes the associate minister till April to define the shape and role of the secretariat, then people sleeping in shelters tonight will be in those shelters this time next year and this time the year after that. Will the associate minister explain to the House what she is doing right now to help people who don’t have adequate housing? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is a very important announcement, a secretariat to actually deal with the issue of homelessness, and that announcement came about because of what the communities in the province are doing at the community level. There’s a whole paradigm shift in this province in regard to homelessness. You know that through the Pathways to Housing program, through Housing First, we house people before we have supports and services for that individual. The secretariat will work with the communities. It is the communities that have asked for this initiative, and they’ll work very closely.

It will be collaborative, it will be research driven, and it will be successful because it’s a solution. But it takes time to develop solutions, and April is not that far away. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview, followed by the hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Royalty Revenues (continued) Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Albertans have been misled for years about the government’s royalty policies.

According to the Auditor General Energy department staff have been considering royalty changes since the year 2000, and at least three years ago they concluded that Alberta’s share had fallen to unacceptable levels. Unacceptable levels. No matter how this government spins it, that means billions of dollars are lost to the people of Alberta. My question is to the Minister of En ergy. Was this Energy minister

Alberta Hansard November 5, 20071788 briefed by the former minister that this was the case, and if not, why not? Mr. Knight: No. Mr. Martin: Let me understand what that minister is saying. He said that when he took over th is Energy portfolio, something as serious as a billion dollars being misplaced was not important enough for that minister to give? He wasn’t briefed about this? Is that what he’s saying? Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, what I’m saying is that there is no billions of dollars missing from anyplace.

There was no requirement for me to get a briefing from any former minister with respect to the royalty structure. I understand the royalty structure, probably much better than the honourable gentleman across the way understands the royalty structure. What I have indicated and what I believe is true is that the royalty structure in the province of Alberta is a policy set by the govern- ment. The policy is not set by reports that are developed both internally and externally and given to any minister at any point in time. Mr. Martin: I couldn’t hear the huffing and the puffing because of the noise.

When the Auditor General comes out and says that Alberta’s share has fallen to unacceptable levels and that government doesn’t see that as important to change right away, where is the responsibility here, Mr. Minister? That is not your money. That is the people of Alberta’s money that was wasted there, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, I have indicated previously and will repeat that I am actually in agreement with the Auditor General’s report. The outcomes of that report we’re dealing with, and we’re dealing with the Auditor General on a continuing basis. However, there are no missing billions.

Those dollars remained in the province of Alberta, were invested, were a magnet for additional dollars. There are literally hundreds of billions of dollars that have been invested in this province over the period of time that these members speak about. It was very good policy. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Elbow. 2:10 Staffing of Human Services Agencies Rev. Abbott: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Alberta’s human services agencies have told government that if they could attract and keep more qualified staff, they would be in a better position to offer the high-quality services that Albertans expect and need. My first question is to the Minister of Seniors and Community Supports. What has your ministry done to help agencies recruit and retain qualified personnel for important areas such as PDD staffing? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s really an honour to work with the tremendous staff of the contracted agencies as they provide services for persons with developmental disabilities. They do tremendous work for those individuals. I am pleased to announce also today that we are increasing funding for those agencies by $15 million. We’re adding those funds in response to knowing that the labour market is hot, that the wages in the other jurisdictions, whether it be the public or private sector, are increasing. As such, we want to see that those agencies are able to retain those staff to do this very important work. The Speaker: The hon. member.

Rev. Abbott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first supplemental to the same minister: can Albertans expect to see more permanent residential spaces open up for persons with developmental disabili- ties due to today’s funding announcement? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, this funding is to be directed solely towards wages of contracted agencies. It’s not to be intended for additional aspects of the program delivery. This is specifically for those contracted agencies to provide additional dollars, through their salaries, for those individuals that work for them. That said, this is a lot more than just about money.

We supply over half a billion dollars for about 9,100 individuals, a very substantive amount, one of the largest am ounts of money of anywhere in this country. It is not just about dollars. It’s about how we get the effective services to those individuals. We are working very closely with those agencies to ensure that we look at our service delivery as well. How do we get those funds to the people when they need it in the fashion they need it? The Speaker: The hon. member. Rev. Abbott: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. My second supplemen- tal is to the Minister of Children’s Services.

Given that Alberta’s human services agencies do reach right across the chr onological gamut, can the minister advise this House what this new funding announcement will do for the children and families of this province? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Tarchuk: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are contributing $10 million to add to today’s announcement. I can tell you that this will be very good news for the contracted agencies who deliver very necessary and important services for Children’s Services.

Over the last couple of months I’ve had an opportunity to visit many of them and to tour their programs, and I can tell you that I have been in absolute awe of their commitment and dedication to the children of this province. I know that this will go a long way in helping them with their staffing issues, but more important I think this is a great recognition of our commitment to them and our value of that working industry. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Elbow. Calgary Infrastructure Funding Mr. Cheffins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Calgary desperately needs a complete ring road, and the most pressing

section of that road is the southwest leg. Calgarians have known this for years, yet we continue to be mired in uncertainty, delay, and concerns over the cost of a deal for the right-of-way. More revenue would move this project forward, but this government has failed to collect billions of dollars in resource royalties as the Auditor General has shown. To the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation: how can the minister justify to Calgarians the lack of any land deal with the Tsuu T’ina and no construction under way? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Ouellette: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s very easy to justify.

November 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1789 We started one ring road just this summer, we’re finishing one ring road there, and we’re very serious with our negotiations with the Tsuu T’ina. We honour the right to be able to negotiate that deal with them. We have full intentions that we are going to go through with the deal, and we have full intentions that someday we’re going to come to the proper agreement. Mr. Cheffins: Mr. Speaker, the cost increases on the south Calgary hospital project have quite rightly made headlines all over this province.

Because of the delays in providing funding for the project, the cost of the building has spiralled. Of course, if the government had been collecting another $1 billion to $2 billion in royalties as they should have been, this hospital could already have been built. To the Minister of Health and Wellness: how can the minister justify the completely unnecessary cost inflation from $550 million to $1.2 billion and delays on the south Calgary hospital? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, there haven’t been any delays on the south Calgary hospital. This hon. member is too recent to know what’s going on, I guess.

The planning for the Calgary south health campus was announced a number of years ago. The planning process has been in place. The process has continued apace. It was budgeted for, and it’s continuing to be budgeted for. There have been increases in terms of what’s been planned for that area, and there have been increases in construction costs, but there haven’t been delays in the process. It’s proceeding rapidly. Mr. Cheffins: Calgarians have known about this. Calgarians have been waiting since you blew up a hospital in Calgary. So my constituents know better. Mr.

Speaker, Calgary’s postsecondary institutions have also felt the burden of underfunding. Mount Royal College needs a library. SAIT desperately needs to expand its trades and technology complex. A lack of funding for their urban campus has held that project back. No money, ever more delays. To the Minister of Advanced Education and Technology: again, given this govern- ment’s utter failure to collect our fair share of resource revenue, how can the minister justify not building these projects? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Horner: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, perhaps the hon. member across the way will learn over time that he should really check with the proponents of some of these projects before he starts talking about them in this House. The urban campus is a perfect example of this. We are working on the urban campus with a number of the proponents. However, what was going to be program delivery has not been decided yet. The other partners that may become involved, like ACAT, have not been decided yet. These are things that the partners have had difficulty bringing together. It’s not that we’ve had a lack of funding.

In fact, we’ve granted some funding to the planning for the urban campus just recently. I’d also like to suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that had we . . . The Speaker: I have to call on the hon. Member for Wetaskiwin- Camrose. Oil Sands Development Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I understand that Prime Minister Stephen Harper is back home in our beautiful province today visiting Fort McMurray and our valuable oil sands industry there. [interjection] My questions are to the Minister of Interna- tional, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations.

What are the measurable economic impacts that Alberta’s oil sands are having on Alberta and the rest of Canada? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Boutilier: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’ll give serious contemplation to naming a particular lake after, perhaps, Harry some day; lake Harry does have a particular sound to it that I think we’ll have to contemplate. At this particular point in time I’d like to say that the real benefit is simply this: over $150 billion; we are the envy of every province and territory in Canada in terms of what we are doing; over a thousand new construction jobs.

I’m very pleased to say that our Prime Minister is visiting the oil sands capital of the world because it is about the future of our young people and the wealth that comes from the oil sands. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My second and final question is to the same minister. How is Alberta’s prosperity helping to fuel Canada’s economic growth? Mr. Boutilier: Well, Mr.

Speaker, our Premier just recently was on Bay Street in Toronto, and when he was speaking at the Empire Club, he talked about the powerful economic punch that our province has in terms of what we are contributing. We contribute almost $9 billion to the federation of Canada, but what is more important are the jobs we create in other parts of Canada and within Alberta. That’s good news for Alberta; it’s good news for Canada.

As the Premier said, and rightfully so, from the respect he’s garnered from other Premiers at the Council of the Federation in Moncton, New Brunswick – other Premiers defended Alberta by saying: let’s not kill the goose that is laying the golden eggs. Unlike what the Liberals and the New Democrats want to do. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. 2:20 Health Care Funding Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Calgarians continue to suffer the consequences of this government’s failure to meet their needs, which is particularly galling given this government’s refusal to collect an additional $1 billion to $2 billion each year since 2000. Seven urgent surgeries were postponed last week in Calgary because there were no intensive care beds av ailable. My question is to the minister of health. What is the minister doing to address the short- term lack of capacity across the province, especially in Calgary, where surgeries are being cancelled because beds and staff are not available?

The south Calgary hospital is not going to help today. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are a number of assumptions in that question which ought to be addressed; first of all, the suggestion of lost billions that keeps coming up over and over from these people. They fail to understand that an increase in the cost to business over that period of time when the prices of oil and gas were low might have had an entirely different effect. So they shouldn’t be just assuming that there are billions of dollars.

To the more important question, the question about dealing with the needs of Albertans when it comes to surgeries and the beds being

Alberta Hansard November 5, 20071790 available. There is an issue in this province. There’s an issue of a shortage of people, and we’ve been working very hard in Health with Employment, Immigration and Industry and with Advanced Education to make sure that we have the nursing personnel both being trained here in this province and coming from abroad to work in those places. There’s not a shortage of infrastructure right now; it’s a shortage of people. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. That’s not short term you’re talking about. To the same minister.

A shortage of long-term care beds contrib- utes to backups in hospitals, including longer wait times in the emergency room. With only 2 per cent of the lost billions at least 11 new continuing care facilities could have been built in Edmonton, Smoky Lake, Crowsnest Pass, Taber, Pincher Creek, Coaldale, Lacombe, Wetaskiwin, Bow Island, Bassano, and Hythe. What excuse does the minister have for the province’s shortage of long- term care beds? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The real issue today, as I said in the answer to the last question, is about people.

The success of this province is such that the economy has been so strong that it has been difficult to get enough people to fill the jobs to keep those beds open. There are long-term care capacity needs, but the primary concern is not the beds. It’s the health care aides, the personal care aides, to be able to provide the services needed in those areas. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. Again to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr.

Speaker, the $6 billion this government failed to collect over the past seven years, minimum, could have paid the salary of over 5,000 doctors a year or 17,000 nurses a year or built new cancer centres in Calgary, Grande Prairie, Lethbridge, and Red Deer. Why didn’t the minister lobby his colleagues to collect a fair share of royalties so it could fund these essential health services? Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, the question of what’s a fair share of royalties is a question of a point in time.

When the royalty design that is currently in place was brought in, the price of oil was around $11 and the cost of extraction in the oil sands was around $17 a barrel. Times change, and our Premier moved immediately upon being elected Premier to call for a royalty review because in the last three to four years the price of oil has now reached the level that it is at. To suggest that there’s a large amount of money out there that could have built a lot of things or paid for a lot of things is abso- lutely invalid.

The Speaker: Well, hon. members, considering we’ve had a little sojourn for about four and a half months, that wasn’t really that bad. We had 84 questions and answers today, and tomorrow we’ll just ask you to sort of tighten things up just a bit more so we can try and get in a few more questions and answers. But it’s important to have this opportunity to allow exuberance to come in after a little sojourn. We’re going back now to tablings. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford was next on my list. head: Tabling Returns and Reports (continued) Mr. R. Miller: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

On Friday evening last I had the opportunity to attend the seventh annual registered apprenticeship program 2007 scholarship celebrations at the Chateau Lacombe. I just want to say what a wonderful event it was. I had an opportunity to sit with Christopher Rooyakkers and his parents. He’s a chef apprentice, graduated from McNally high school. They were quite enlightening in terms of sharing informa- tion. I’m also proud to say that a resident of Edmonton-Rutherford, Brennan Haycock, who graduated from Louis St. Laurent, is now an apprentice electrician.

I’m happy to table five copies of the program from that evening for other members to review. The Speaker: Are there others under tablings? If not, then the chair has three. Hon. members, pursuant to

section 39(3) of the Legislative Assembly Act the chair would like to table with the Assembly five copies of Members’ Services Committee Order MSC 1/07, Constitu- ency Services Amendment Order (No. 19), which came into force on October 24, 2007. The subject matter has to do with a recommenda- tion from the Auditor General to take a look at the gifts and promotional items portfolio of all members’ constituency office allocations. This is being tabl ed, and members might spend a few minutes looking at it. Pursuant to

section 28(1) of the Ombudsman Act I’m pleased to table with the Assembly the 39th annual report of the office of the Ombudsman for the period April 1, 2005, to March 31, 2006. For the first time in our history, as per Standing Orders changes made last spring, Standing Order 55.01, this report is referred to the Standing Committee on Legislative Offices. A copy of this report was distributed to members on October 24. Pursuant to

section 46(1) of the Conflicts of Interest Act,

chapter C-23 of the Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000 I’m also pleased to table with the Assembly the annual report of the Ethics Commis- sioner. This report covers the period April 1, 2006, to March 31, 2007. Again as per Standing Order 55.01 this report is referred to the Standing Committee on Legislative Offices. A copy of this report was distributed to members on July 25, 2007. head: Tablings to the Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following documents were deposited with the office of the Clerk. On behalf of the hon. Mr. Renner, Minister of Environment, responses to questions raised by Mr.

Bonko, the hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore, on June 7, 2007, in the Department of Environment 2007-08 main estimates debate; response to Written Question 15, asked for by Mr. MacDon- ald on June 11, 2007; return to order of the Assembly MR 8, asked for by Mr. Chase on behalf of Dr. Swann on June 11, 2007; pursuant to the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, the Ministry of Environment environmental protection security fund annual report, April 1, 2006, to March 31, 2007. On behalf of the hon. Mr.

Horner, Minister of Advanced Educa- tion and Technology, pursuant to the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research Act the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research 2007 annual report. The Speaker: Hon. members, before moving on, might we revert briefly to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (continued) The Speaker: The hon. Associate Minister for Capital Planning.

November 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1791 Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you very much, colleagues and Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and through you a very diligent constituent of mine, Mr. Vince Laberge, who has a keen interest in provincial proceedings. I know he cares deeply about the affordable housing initiative, as do I. He’s very well known to me and to other members of the House here for providing very sound and solid advice to us on many o ccasions, today being one of them. I see he has risen. Welcome now, if you will, Mr. Vince Laberge. Thank you.

The Speaker: Hon. members, earlier today during the Routine under Notices of Motions the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre rose to give notice about a point of privilege she wanted to raise. There was no need under that part of the Routine, and no motion is required in terms of a member rising on a point of privilege. The member advised my office on Friday that she was going to be doing this, and that’s perfectly acceptable. The document has been circulated. That can just be put in the storage container beside your desk.

Unless there is a prima facie case of privilege arrived at by determination, there is no motion that can proceed. At the moment the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre is being recognized if she rises on a point of privilege. Privilege Misleading the House Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This point of privilege arises out of a series of events that took place in this Assembly and subsequent to that on April 30, 2007. The direct exchange is found in Hansard on page 694.

At that time the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar asked a question of the Minister of Energy regarding a tabling that had happened earlier specific to the content of the 2005-2006 internal royalty review. Significant portions had not been tabled or had been censored from what was tabled. In his response the Member for Grande Prairie-Smoky, who is also, of course, the Minister of Energy, indicated, “Mr.

Speaker, there is nothing in any of those documents that would indicate to anybody that we have not collected a fair share of royalties for Albertans.” In fact, there were a number of references in the documents that were tabled, censored as they were, that did indicate that. Mr. Speaker, the member made misleading statements. In doing so, he defied the dignity of the Assembly and interfered with the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar’s ability to discharge his duties as the Official Opposition shadow minister of Energy.

I would also add that because of the minister’s statements that day, the Member for Edmonton-Riverview was also impeded in the fulfillment of his duties as opposition leader in holding the government accountable. 2:30 Mr. Speaker, there are several tests that I need to meet today. First of all, notification, which you noted and as outlined in Standing Order 15(2). Written notice was provided to you. We also provided a copy to the affected member, the Minister of Energy and Member for Grande Prairie-Smoky, and, as a courtesy, to the Government House Leader. All of this was on Friday, November 2, 2007.

I attempted to give oral notice today during Routine, which was not necessary. A second test that must be met in these cases is that the point is raised at the earliest possible opportunity. The statements were made on April 30, and we believed them to be misleading at the time, but with the release of the Auditor General’s report on Tuesday, October 2, this confirmed the fact that the Assembly had been misled in the member’s statements of April 30. There are two examples I will give you, Mr.

Speaker, that address situations where misleading statements from a member were verified as incorrect and became known at a later date. All of these were as a result of the report of an Auditor General or another public inquiry. In Manitoba on April 6, 1999, the then Premier was accused of deliberately misleading the Assembly regarding the Interlake vote splitting scandal, and the subsequent Monnin inquiry illuminated that the information was indeed misleading.

These issues were a result of the Manitoba provincial election in 1995, and the Manitoba Speaker agreed that the point of privilege had been lodged at the earliest opportunity, that being as soon as it was verified through the report some four years later. Likewise, allegations that the Manitoba Assembly had been deliberately misled because of statements relative to the Crocus superfund scandal did not surface until several years afterwards. Then a quote from the hon. Jon Gerrard.

He says: I raise this issue now because until we had the Cabinet document of November 27, 2000, we did not know in this Legislature that we . . . and the people of Manitoba generally have been so badly misled by the Minister of Finance. Again, in this situation the Speaker found that the elapsed time was not a bar to the matter. Clearly, the Minister of Energy made statements that misled this Assembly. The content of his department’s own review offers evidence that the opposite was the case. Now, specifically the intentions of the minister.

As we have noted, his only intention could have been to mislead this Assembly because his own review showed that for many years the royalty structure was not, as he said, building a stronger Alberta. What privilege has been breached? Looking at Marleau and Montpetit on page 51, I quote: “The House has the authority to invoke privilege where its ability has been obstructed in the execution of its functions or where Members have been obstructed in the performance of their duties.” The essential role of the Official Opposition is holding the government accountable for its actions.

In that role question period is one of our most important tools for calling the government to account, and as Beauchesne’s Parliamen- tary Rules and Forms, sixth edition, states at 410(5), our ability to call the government to account for the loss of billions of dollars was hindered to a degree that was shameful. Now, Mr.

Speaker, it would be naïve to suggest that every question in this Assembly will receive an answer, but I do note in Beauchesne’s 97, quoting Speaker Sauvé, that while it is correct to say that the government is not required by our rules to answer written or oral questions, it would be bold to suggest that no circumstances could ever exist for a prima facie question of privilege to be made where there was a deliberate attempt to deny answers to an Hon. Member, if it could be shown that such action amounted to improper interference with the Hon. Member’s parliamentary work.

Indeed, I believe that happened in the case specifically for the members for Edmonton-Gold Bar and Edmonton-Riverview. The statements of the Member for Grande Prairie-Smoky have prevented these key functions. It greatly affected the ability of the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar to perform his role as Energy critic. Had the information collected by the Department of Energy been accurately reported before this Assembly, then the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar would have conducted further inquiries and handled his duties differently.

At the time of the utterance made on April 30, there were still 23 sitting days remaining in the session. Those are days the Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar could have used differently had he not been misled.

Alberta Hansard November 5, 20071792 The disrespect for the Assembly also greatly affected the conduct of the Member for Edmonton-Riverview in his role as Leader of the Official Opposition. For two months our own members but also those of other opposition parties were prevented from the effective conduct of their duties in this House and outside of it. This is not a case where the information was not available, where facts were uncertain, or where the member was not informed of proceedings. All the information was in this minister’s possession.

His own department had passed on their conclusion, and the report of the Auditor General states this point with absolute clarity. In the annual report of the Auditor General of Alberta, volume 1, pages 91 and 92, the Auditor General states that the Department of Energy knew at least three years ago that Alberta’s share had fallen below the target range.

Without a doubt, in the period pr eceding the incident in question the member had been advised that this royalty structure was neither building a stronger Alberta, nor had the government collected a fair share of royalties for Albertans, as he stated in his responses on the 30th of April. We hold these misleading statements to be a grave breach of privilege. The authorities I use, Mr. Speaker, include Marleau and Montpetit, providing explicit guidance on the concepts of contempt and privilege, pages 51 to 53 and 66 to 67.

Also, those basic privileges are expanded in Joseph Maingot’s Parliamentary Privilege in Canada, second edition, page 193. I have also given a number of examples of Beauchesne’s parliamentary rules at 410 and 97. In order to represent the people of this province, it is clear that the integrity of this Hous e and its individual members be treated with respect. How can we command any measure of public respect when members act in such a fashion?

I have already spoken of the importance of the role of the Official Opposition in ensuring accountability of the government, which we were precluded from doing because the statements we were given were false or misleading. Mr. Speaker, this is not a situation that involves a misstatement or a misunderstanding of the use of language. It is not an issue that could have given rise to a subjective difference of opinion. What we are dealing with here is a deliberate attempt to frustrate the operation of this Assembly. This situation constitutes more than a mere allegation of misleading this House.

The time has come for the government to accept absolute res ponsibility for the comments of this member before this Assembly. I am guided by previous rulings from this Speaker, specifically May 4 of 2000 in Hansard, appearing on page 1339: “Members have to be responsible for what they say in this House, absolutely responsible, and there’s no shirking of that responsibility.” When referring to a purported matter of privilege on March 12, 2002, Hansard, page 267, the Speaker outlined this valuable guidance.

In this case the allegation made by the member at that time for Edmonton-Highlands focused on a certain subjective

interpretation. “Such an allegation is at best a disagreement between members and hardly meets the test of a point of order.” But, Mr. Speaker, in this situation we clearly have a minister who provided information that either he knew to be false or, alternatively, should have known through the exercise of due diligence that the information was misleading. Information cannot be subjectively misleading. The minister was confronted with the full and unedited text of the report and chose to contradict it. This behaviour is without doubt deliberately mislead- ing.

How can contradictory information which is known to the member be subjectively interpreted? If an individual offers information before a court of law that they know is false, that person is guilty of contempt, Mr. Speaker. What you have before you is just such a situation. I ask the Speaker to rule that a prima facie case of breach of privilege has been established. Thank you. The Speaker: Hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder, I’m not sure where you’d be coming from on this point, but there is a case of privilege raised by the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Centre, and it would be most appropriate now to allow the hon. member who’s been named in this point to respond as he chooses to respond at this point in time. The hon. Minister of Energy. 2:40 Mr. Knight: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m actually pleased to have an opportunity here to initially respond to the point of privilege made by the hon. member. Simply put, I have nothing but the utmost respect for this Assembly, and I would not do anything to intentionally mislead you, Mr. Speaker, any of my colleagues, or any members of this Assembly or, for that matter, Albertans.

It’s important to note that the Premier announced last December that the Department of Finance would be undertaking a public royalty review. In fact, Mr. Speaker, this announcement was made formally through the mandate letter issued to the Minister of Finance on the very same day that I was appointed Minister of Energy. During the entire time that I’ve had the privilege of being Alberta’s Minister of Energy, this public consultation and review has been ongoing with the exception of the past two weeks, when the Premier announced our government’s new royalty framework.

It was never my intent to prejudge the work of either the Royalty Review Panel or the Auditor General or to comment on work that had been done in the past. As part of the review process, Mr. Speaker, I took steps to ensure that the panel and the public had the information and support they needed from this ministry, including the release of analytical reports prepared for the Department of Energy by outside consultants.

Keeping in mind copyright laws and FOIP legislation, I tabled what I could in this Assembly, and I asked that the full reports, where they could be viewed by the public, be placed in the depart- ment’s library. This was done, Mr. Speaker, in the name of ensuring that the panel and all Albertans had access to information that could help them reach their own conclusions about our royalty regime. It is in this context, Mr. Speaker, that I rose on April 30, 2007, to respond to a series of questions posed to me by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar.

The question related to a specific set of documents I tabled in the House on April 16, 2007. The hon. member was asking about a chart which was part of, to use his words, “an extensive review of our royalty structure between 2005 and 2006” and why it wasn’t tabled in the House. In looking at only one part of an answer I gave to those questions from the member last spring, the hon. member is taking my point out of context. As Hansard clearly shows, Mr.

Speaker, I said that you can look at any snapshot in time or look at one aspect of the system and draw a variety of conclusions about the performance of our royalty regime. However, if you choose to do that, I would suggest that your conclusions won’t be very well informed because they are not considering the entire situation. The hon. member is doing the same thing with my statement: looking at one portion of it, drawing conclusions, and making allegations.

I stand by my comments from last spring, which were clearly in reference to the Wood Mackenzie documents and, specifically, information regarding internal international comparisons, which I have made public, by the way. Taken on its own, that information, international comparisons, does not consider countless other factors

November 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1793 such as cost environments, productivity levels, anticipated commod- ity pricing, or any other factors that must be considered before deciding whether a royalty regime is appropriate and effective. As I said on that day, the information in the Wood Mackenzie documents is not sufficient to reach a well-informed decision on whether Albertans are receiving a fair share from the development of our energy resources. The table in question indicates what others are receiving and does not at any point make reference or determine what is fair.

If it was not clear in my answers that day that I was specifically referring to the Wood Mackenzie documents – and I believe that the hon. member was questioning me about that – then I apologize to my hon. colleagues. Clearly, the opposition feel that the present royalty system would not be the one that they would design. That is their right as Alber- tans and their role as opposition members in this Assembly. I believe in the new royalty framework of the Premier, and, Mr. Speaker, that is my right also.

Difference does not constitute a willful or deliberate attempt to mislead members of the Assembly or Albertans. Thank you for the opportunity to address this matter in the Assembly, Mr. Speaker, and I look forward to your ruling. The Speaker: The chair has heard from two hon. members with respect to this matter. As this is all now in Hansard, the only opportunity the chair and the table officers will have to review both arguments will be to review the Hansard, which we can’t possibly do for several hours yet. So I will defer any decision with respect to this.

I mean, there’s lots of information contained in both state- ments. Also, both hon. members have only had an opportunity in the last few minutes to hear the arguments from one another, so I offer them an opportunity to read attentively what’s included in Hansard, the arguments from both sides. Should there be a need for either member to add something further to this matter, we’ll invite you with the conclusion of the Routine tomorrow afternoon to do so as we move forward with respect to this matter. In other words, the chair will not have a decision rendered by tomorrow but will give both members, the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Centre and the hon. Member for Grande Prairie-Smoky an opportunity tomorrow to look at that matter. I appreciate the responsible approach taken by both hon. members with respect to this. head: Emergency Debate The Speaker: Now we have the hon. Member for Edmonton- Highlands-Norwood, who has a Standing Order 30 application. Royalty Revenues Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to Standing Order 30 I would move that we adjourn the ordinary business of the Assembly to discuss a matter of urgent public importance; namely, the failure of the government to promptly introduce and pass royalty legislation to prevent the loss of billions of dollars to the public treasury as oil prices rise dramatically. Mr. Speaker, under this I would like to indicate that in

section 30(7) motions under this standing order are subject to the following conditions. First of all, that “the matter proposed for discussion must relate to a genuine emergency, calling for immediate and urgent consideration.” I would argue that the government’s failure to bring forward legislation at the beginning of this session means that Albertans stand to lose billions of dollars in revenue as the delay prevents the implementation of ne w royalty legislation that would raise rates.

The government has stated that it does not intend to have its new royalty rates take effect until 2009, and it does not intend to bring forward legislation on the matter in this session; therefore, there is no other opportunity to debate this issue. Mr. Speaker, with the price of a barrel of oil just about now reaching $100, the unwillingness of the government to move quickly and promptly on the issue will cost the public treasury millions of dollars by the minute between now and 2009, and the implications of such a sizable loss of revenue make this an urgent matter.

Other requirements that “not more than one . . . motion may be proceeded with on the same day” seem to be satisfied.

Section (

c) that “not more than one matter may be discussed on the same motion” I think is met. That “the motion must not revive discussion on a matter that has been discussed in the same session pursuant to this Standing Order” has been met. The motion is not based on a question of privilege, and discussion under the motion does not raise a question that can only be debated on a motion on notice. Mr.

Speaker, I just want to indicate that the failure of the govern- ment in the past but also going forward to deal adequately with the question of royalties has cost the treasury of this province b illions upon billions of dollars. The decision of the government not to proceed with legislation immediately in this session means that additional massive quantities of cash which ought to be coming to the people of this province will instead flow to large multinational oil and gas companies. 2:50 Mr.

Speaker, this is an urgent matter because we all know that there are priorities among the people of this province that are crying out for solutions, and the government’s negligence, dare I say, on this whole question has cost Albertans dearly.

I believe that this is a most urgent matter which requires the full attention of the Assembly, and we should be debating this question of royalties today in this House so that all Albertans can see where all of the parties stand on the matter and that we can ensure, hopefully, that the value of our resources, which is the heritage of our children and our grandchildren, is adequately captured by a government policy that puts the people of this provin ce first, not the multinational oil companies. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Do others want to offer some guidance to the chair? The hon.

Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would oppose the adjourning of the ordinary business of the House to speak to this matter for a number of reasons. One should only do that in the most urgent of cases, and while the question of royalties is very important – the whole question of the royalty regime and the way forward with respect to royalties is absolutely one of the most important questions for Albertans today – it doesn’t necessary meet the test of urgency as has been framed by the hon. member today.

He wants to have the House adjourn to discuss the failure of the government to promptly introduce and pass royalty legislation. Well, this is day 1 of the session. No additional legislation has been introduced this fall as yet because it is day 1 of the session. But I will say that I did indicate as House leader that it was not our intention to bring legislation forward this fall because it takes time to properly draft legislation to make sure that it has the appropriate effect, and it takes time to put in place the necessary technology to give effect to the legislation.

It’s been made very clear by this government what the new royalty regime will be and when it will

Alberta Hansard November 5, 20071794 take effect, and the legislation that’s needed to do that will be drafted carefully and appropriately and brought into the House when it’s ready to do so. Now, the question of the passing of the legislation, of course, is not the government’s purview; it’ s this House’s purview, so to debate the failure of the government to pass royalty legislation really denigrates the role of the House.

Preventing the loss of a billion do llars to the public treasury is another piece of it, and quite frankly if that’s what the hon. member wants to debate, then there will be supplementary supply this fall, and there will be an opportunity during that supplementary s upply to talk about whatever the hon. member might want to bring forward. So there are a number of reasons why. While the question of royalties and the royalty process is a very important question for Albertans, the Standing Order 30 that’s brought forward by the member today doesn’t pass the tests of urgency and appropriateness. The Speaker: Others?

Okay. Well, the chair is prepared to rule on this matter. First, the chair confirms that the notice of the application was provided to the Speaker’s office this morning at 9:55 by the Member for Edmonton- Beverly-Clareview of the leader’s intention to seek permission, so the requirement in terms of notification certainly has been met.

Secondly, before the question as to whether this motion should proceed to be put to the Assembly, the chair must rule whether the motion meets the requirements of Standing Order 30(7), which requires that the matter proposed for discussion relates to “a genuine emergency, calling for immediate and urgent consideration.” The relevant parliamentary authorities on the topic are Beau- chesne’s, paragraphs 387, 390, and House of Commons Procedure and Practice , pages 587 to 589.

The chair has reviewed these references closely in considering this request for leave, and there are two key points that the chair would like to emphasize to all mem- bers. First, to meet the requirements of urgency, there must not be another opportunity for members of the Assembly to discuss the matter, and secondly, the matter must relate to a genuine emergency. The wording of the member’s proposed motion is as follows. Pursuant to Standing Order 30

be it resolved that the ordinary business of the Legislative Assembly be adjourned to discuss a matter of urgent public importance; namely, the failure of the government to promptly introduce and pass royalty legislation to prevent the loss of billions of dollars to the public treasury as oil prices rise dramatically. One of the key words in all of this is “royalties,” at least in the eyes of the chair, who has been in Alberta for the last five or six months and has heard this word once, twice, three times. The chair has listened attentively to arguments from both sides of the Assembly in this matter.

The chair would however like to make some preliminary comments about Standing Order 30 applications generally. First, the chair has difficulty with the language used in the proposed application. It is provocative, pejorative, and in parts simply incorrect. The incorrect portion is where it says that the government can “introduce and pass royalty legislation.” The government can certainly introduce the legislation, but it is only this Assembly that can pass it. The chair would think that this is a rather fundamental aspect of the law-making process of which members are involved.

The chair raised similar issues in an application by the leader of the third party on May 10, 2005, at pages 1400 to 1401 for that day. The chair’s concern is that even though the debate under Standing Order 30 does not entail a decision of the Assembly, it would be perceived that if the application was to succeed, people can infer that the chair and members agree with the provocative wording, which is not the case.

To return to the wording of Standing Order 30, suborder (1) refers to a member requesting leave to adjourn the ordinary business of the Assembly to discuss a matter of, again, “urgent public importance.” The chair interprets the motion to be for the adjournment of the business of the Assembly. It should not entail the sort of wording found in the member’s motion. The chair interprets the request to be for a discussion in the Assembly concerning royalties on petroleum- based resources. That’s the

interpretation that the chair gives to the submission. The chair would also draw to all members’ attention that this

interpretation may have further implications, and you may find those further implications under Standing Order 30(7)(d). In terms of meeting the urgency requirement, the chair has closely reviewed today’s Order Paper to determine whether there is another opportunity afforded to members to discuss this very serious matter. It does not appear to the chair based on the November 5, 2007, Order Paper that there will be an opportunity other than the question period to debate the issue of royalties and all that has happened since the Assembly last met.

Finally, although the chair has concerns with the wording of the hon. member’s motion, the chair would be hard-pressed to find that the matter of royalty rates in the province of Alberta is not a matter that qualifies as a genuine emergency for the purposes of having a debate in this Assembly on this matter this afternoon. The chair would not in any way want to be taken as saying that this does not constitute a genuine emergency when so much of the province’s economic life revolves around nonrenewable energy resources.

Accordingly, the chair finds that the request for leave is in order and now puts the following question: shall the debate on the urgent matter proceed? I suspect that all members would like to know the process and the procedure. I’ll go through the process and the procedure just so that everybody is aware of this; this is so infrequent that we’ve arrived at this kind of a conclusion. If 15 or more members rise, the debate proceeds and the Speaker calls upon the hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood.

The debate time would then be 10 minutes and conclude when all members who wish to take part have spoken or at 6 this afternoon, whichever occurs first. So if 15 or more members rise, the debate proceeds. If at least five members but less than 15 rise, the question on whether the member has leave to move adjournment of the ordinary business is put immediately and if necessary determined by a division; in other words, although the chair has said that this can proceed, if there are between five and 15 members, you will then vote yes or no, and you can overrule the chair.

This is not a vote of confidence in the chair. The third option is the following: if fewer than five members rise, the motion does not proceed. So the question is now asked: shall the debate on the urgent matter proceed? [Fewer than 15 but more than five members rose. The division bell was rung at 3 p.m.] [Ten minutes having elapsed, the Assembly divided] The Speaker: Hon. members, first of all, we have not called Orders of the Day yet, so if there are outside liquids in the Assembly, this is still inappropriate.

Secondly, this being a rather unique situation, for those members who may not have been in the Chamber, who may have been out

November 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1795 taking a very important call, dealing with a constituent and the like, there has been opportunity already. If 15 or more members would have risen, we would have proceeded to this debate per se. We are now into a division, and it will be a majority vote that will determine the decision. It will not be 15 or more members alone that will cause this action to move in a certain direction.

We currently have the question: shall the debate on the urgent matter proceed? 3:10 For the motion: Abbott Goudreau Mitzel Agnihotri Griffiths Ouellette Amery Hancock Pannu Blakeman Hayden Pastoor Boutilier Hinman Pham Brown Horner Renner Cao Jablonski Rodney Cenaiko Johnson Rogers Chase Johnston Shariff Cheffins Lindsay Stevens DeLong Lund Strang Dunford Martin Taft Eggen Marz Tarchuk Elsalhy Mason Taylor Evans Melchin Tougas Forsyth Miller, B.

Webber Fritz Against the motion: Ducharme Liepert Morton Graydon Lukaszuk Oberle Groeneveld Magnus Prins Knight McFarland Totals: For – 49 Against – 11 [Motion to adjourn the ordinary business of the Assembly carried] The Speaker: The chair will now call on the hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood to pro ceed and will draw to all members’ attention Standing Orders 30(5), (6), and (7). Essentially, the speaking time is now 10 minutes per member. When all members who wish to take part have spoken, the debate will end or at the normal hour of adjournment, which would be 6 o’clock this afternoon.

This debate does not entail any decision of the Assembly, and no vote is taken. All members may provide their thoughts for 10 minutes. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, it’s an unexpected pleasure and a great honour to rise to speak to the Standing Order 30 request for a debate on royalties. This is an issue that has been of great interest to Albertans from one corner of our province to the other for the past several months, and in fact it’s an issue that goes way back in time in this province.

I want to go back to the days when Peter Lougheed, formerly the Premier of this province and a Conservative leader, raised royalties not once but twice, in 1972 and 1974, and the howls of outrage from the oil industry when he did that, Mr. Speaker. The oil companies stayed, and in fact Alberta has prospered. That brings me to the present decision of the government to raise royalties by an amount which is less than was recommended by the royalty task force of the province, which talked about raising royalties. That was for us a minimum amount, a good starting pl ace.

That task force report would have increased the revenue of the province by approximately $2 billion per year. The government’s proposal falls short of that mark and raises royalties by $1.4 billion according to the govern- ment’s own numbers. Mr. Speaker, clearly, the standard which I think the people of Alberta set, which is that the royalty task force recommendations are a bare minimum, has not been met by the government. We have the Premier taking out at great public expense advertising in newspa- pers, on radio, and so on claiming that he has met a commitment to the people of Alberta. He has not.

He has not met the commitment the people of Alberta expect. Let’s be clear. The value of the oil in this province is rising very, very dramatically. Just the other day the price of oil hit nearly $96 per barrel. The royalty regime we’re now dealing with was set in the days of $15 a barrel. Mr. Speaker, in the last election the Alberta NDP was the only party to call for an increase in royalties. The reaction that we got from the leader of the Conservative Party at that time, Mr. Klein, was that it was a new NDP NEP, that it would bring about a disaster when royalties were raised.

The Liberals were completely silent on this question during the last election, when we were the only party that stood up in favour of higher royalties. Mr. Speaker, we now are faced with the prospect of $100 a barrel oil or higher. The royalty task force members have said that what they represented in their report was actually a compromise. In fact, they retained the penny-on-the-dollar royalty for the oil sands plants that were not fully paid out, and that, I think, is unacceptable. The Premier has talked about raising it to a nickel.

No other industry receives that degree of subsidization from the public purse for its capital costs. In fact, the economic rent that we r eceive under the new proposal of the government will fall very far short of the potential of this province. The government claims that it is going to increase royalties by 20 per cent. The Liberal opposition claims that they are going to raise royalties by 20 per cent. Well, Mr. Speaker, I just want to indicate that that falls well short of the economic rent on these resources.

In fact, when oil increases from $80 to $100 and from $100 to $120 a barrel, there is no additional value that is brought by the operations of the company. These companies are profitable at $50 a barrel, so when it goes much higher than that, why then does the government regime allow the majority of that increased value to flow to the companies? Where does it go?

There’s so much talk on the other side about the oil industry and the benefits that it brings to this province’s economy, and that’s true, but what they overlook is that the bulk of the profits that these oil companies are making is actually going to shareholders. If you look at EnCana, last year it posted the highest profit of any company in Canadian history, $6.3 billion profit. Mr. Speaker, EnCana could have paid the whole $2 billion that the royalty task force proposed for an increase and still been able to give its share- holders $4.3 billion in value. Mr.

Speaker, I think that it’s clear that this government has settled for peanuts. We will remain among the lowest royalties in the entire world. Why, when Norway, when Alaska have built up huge funds, are we going to continue to collect a fraction of the value that we as Albertans deserve on our own resources? I thought that the task force report made a very good point. It said that there’s a fundamen- tal difference between taxes and royalties. Taxes are something you take from people who’ve worked hard to earn it, so every penny you take has to be justified.

On the other hand, royalties are something you charge for something that you own, so every penny you don’t take has to be justified. 3:20 Well, Mr. Speaker, this government has not justified the actions that it has taken. It has not justified the fact that it is taking so little

Alberta Hansard November 5, 20071796 of the value. Why is it that under the new proposal Alberta will remain near the very bottom of royalty rates charged in the world? Mr. Speaker, look what we have. We have in northern Alberta an oil deposit that is one of the largest if not the largest untapped reserves of oil in the entire world. Quite frankly, oil companies are finding less oil. We are nearly reaching the point of peak oil, where available supplies will not be growing but will be declining at the same time that oil prices and the demand that drives those prices is increasing constantly.

So what we’re looking at in the long term are continued, sustained, and significant increases in the price of oil on the world market, yet we are settling for less than half of that increase in value. If oil goes up a dollar, under the government’s proposal less than half of that will come back to us, the owners of the resources. I say that it’s pretty clear that this government has caved in to big oil. It has surrendered the position of this province. It has sold the people of Alberta out.

It has not got the best deal that we could have had, and quite frankly I think that the Premier should not be spending taxpayers’ money trying to convince the people that he did get a good deal. It’s pretty obvious when you compare Alberta’s new royalty regime that’s proposed to the royalty regimes of other countries in the world that we didn’t get a good deal. I don’t think that the Premier has delivered on his commitment in any way. Mr. Speaker, the Alberta NDP has been very vocal on this issue from the last election forward to today.

We’ve campaigned very hard and we’ve been very clear that the royalty task force recom- mendations were a bare minimum. The government has caved in to oil company pressure, and I’ve been, quite frankly, very surprised that the Alberta Liberal opposition has been largely silent on this issue. Mr. Elsalhy: Focus on the government. Mr. Mason: Well, he’d like me to focus on the government, but I think there are three parties in this Assembly, Mr. Speaker. An Hon. Member: Four. Mr. Mason: Four. I apologize. It’s important that we all know where we stand. Quite frankly, Mr.

Speaker, the Liberals have been AWOL on this issue. The heavy lifting, as usual, on these kinds of issues has been done by the four-member caucus of the Alberta NDP. Until we get a fair deal on royalties in this province, we’re going to stand up against a Premier who falsely claims that he has delivered on a promise. He has not; he has sold us out. He has left lots and lots of money on the table, billions that will not be available for our children and our grandchil- dren. It’s a shame, and it’s completely unacceptable. Thank you very much. The Speaker: Thank you very much, hon. member.

Speaker’s Ruling Decorum The Speaker: Hon. members, because of what the Assembly has done this afternoon, there wasn’t an opportunity for the chair to say, “Orders of the Day,” which would have allowed outside liquids and laptop computers to be used in the Assembly. So let’s assume that this is okay because you’re going to have a gruelling afternoon, and sustenance is always important for nourishment, not only nourish- ment to the mind but nourishment to the body. And you will not be interrupting anybody with the utilization of laptop computers.

Debate Continued The Speaker: Here’s what I have so far in terms of members who have provided notice of their intent to participate: the Minister of Energy, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the Minister of International, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations, the Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar, the Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner, the Member for Calgary-Nose Hill, the Member for Edmonton-Riverview. That’s probably a pretty good list for the moment. There are other members who have advised. We’ll go with the Minister of Energy. Mr. Knight: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It’s a pleasure for me to stand and join the debate this afternoon with respect to the issue. I would not necessarily agree that, in my humble opinion, it would meet all of the requirements. Nevertheless, we find ourselves here, and I’m happy to engage in this discussion. I agree, in fact, with the Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood that the issue of royalty review and reform is a matter of the highest importance, and I’m sure that all of our colleagues in the Assembly would agree with that.

While the discussion and implementation of the new royalty framework is a matter of utmost significance for this House and for all Albertans, Mr. Speaker, it’s not a matter that can or should be treated with undue haste by this Assembly. The Premier has made a commitment that the new royalty framework will be implemented by this government, and it will be. However, making wholesale changes to Alberta’s royalty systems for conventional oil and gas and for oil sands is not something that can be done overnight.

It requires a series of legislative and regulatory amendments and a host of changes to the Department of Energy’s software systems. At a minimum, Mr.

Speaker, changes will be required to the following acts and regulations: the Mines and Minerals Act, the mines and minerals administration regulation, the petroleum royalty regulation, the oil sands royalty regulation 1997, the oil sands tenure regulation, the natural gas royalty regulation, the freehold mineral rights tax regulation, and four regulations regarding royalty reduc- tion for low productivity for high-cost wells. [The Deputy Speaker in the chair] As all hon. members know, amendments to any complex piece of legislation cannot be written overnight.

They must be carefully drafted by Legislative Counsel in consultation with department officials, who in turn would hold discussions with those who may be affected by these changes. Once the amendments have been scrutinized and fine-tuned in the policy-making process, they can be introduced into this Assembly for debate. Mr. Speaker, I submit that it would be irresponsible of us to do otherwise with a matter of such fundamental importance. In addition to the requirements of due legislative process, Mr. Speaker, there are technical considerations which preclude this issue from being considered an emergency.

Quite frankly, it’s physically impossible to implement any substa ntive change to the province’s royalty system overnight. Alberta Energy currently utilizes five software systems to calculate and collect royalties from industry. Implementing the changes outlin ed in Alberta’s new royalty framework will require new programs as well as substantial rewriting to existing software programs. Of c

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20071105
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L26 S3 20071105 1300 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	1096e4d7292d950d44c053b1d6a85a1ca9f9618f

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