May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 883 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Monday, May 12, 1980 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 51 The Alberta Emblems Amendment Act, 1980 MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce a Bill, The Alberta Emblems Amendment Act, 1980. Bill 51 will describe the new armorial bearings of Alberta, including the arms, crest, supporters, and motto.

In addition, the Act allows the Minister responsible for Culture to make regulations governing the reproduction, use, or display of an official emblem. [Leave granted; Bill 51 read a first time] Bill 55 The Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Amendment Act, 1980 DR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce a Bill, The Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Amendment Act, 1980.

The purpose of this Bill is to deal with some problems with the administration of the Act that showed up during the last election, and generally to clear up some minor amendments that are required in order to have it function better. [Leave granted; Bill 55 read a first time] Bill 52 The Amusements Amendment Act, 1980 MR. COOK: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill No. 52, The Amusements Amendment Act, 1980. The Act provides for deregulation of carnivals, travel­ ling shows, and cinema houses. The Act reflects changes in technology.

For example, the Bill would provide for deregulation of the requirement for projectionists to have a licence. It reflects changes in technology and increases in standards for fire regulations and building safety. [Leave granted; Bill 52 read a first time] MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I move that Bills nos. 51, 52, and 55 be placed on the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] Bill Pr. 5 The Alberta Foundation Act MR. KNAAK: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill No. Pr. 5, The Alberta Foundation Act.

It's a Bill establishing a foundation, one of the objects of which will be to manage the funds of charitable foundations. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 5 read a first time] Bill Pr. 7 The Warren Dean Boyd Adoption Act MR. COOK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to introduce Bill Pr. 7, The Warren Dean Boyd Adoption Act. The Bill provides for the adoption of an adult, and the petitioner requests that the Assembly grant her request to have this adult adopted as her son. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 7 read a first time] Bill Pr. 4 The Keith Dial Adoption Termination Act MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill No.

Pr. 4, The Keith Dial Adoption Termination Act. The purpose of this Bill is to terminate an adoption that was effective in 1940. It was decided by the superin­ tendent of child welfare that the adoption should be cancelled and terminated. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 4 read a first time] head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MRS. LeMESSURIER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the annual report and financial statements of the Alberta Historical Resources Foundation for the year ended December 31, 1979. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS DR. McCRlMMON: Mr.

Speaker, it's my privilege today to introduce to you, and through you to the members of the Assembly, a visitor from the Yukon, the Hon. Dan Lang. He is the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Transportation for the Yukon Territory. He is in your gallery, Mr. Speaker, and I'd ask Him to stand and receive the welcome of the House. MR. WEISS: Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to introduce to you, and through you to the members of this Assem­ bly, a group of 38 students from the Wandering River school in Wandering River. This community is located in the Lac La Biche-Fort McMurray constituency.

These students represent grades 5, 6, and 7 and are accom­ panied by their teachers Mrs. Hunter, Mr. Dodds, a parent Mrs. Mosich, and their capable bus driver who got them here, Mickey Shapka. I would ask that they rise and receive the cordial welcome of this Assembly. DR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to introduce to you, and through you to the members of the Assembly, some 25 students from the Coralwood Junior Academy school, grades 7 and 8. It's a private school operated by the Seventh Day Adventists located in the constituency of Edmonton Kingsway.

They are touring the Legislature Building for their social studies class. I had an opportuni­ ty to meet with them. They have assured me that some of

884 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 them, at least, will write to me. I've asked them to continue their interest in the democratic process. They are in the members gallery. I would ask them to rise and receive the applause of the House. MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce to you, and through you to the members of the Assembly, 21 grade 10 students from Concordia College, which is situated in the constituency of Edmonton Highlands. They are accompanied by their instructor Mr. Richard Willie, and are seated in the public gallery. I would ask them to rise and receive the welcome of the Assembly. MR.

KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure this after­ noon to introduce to you, and through you to members of this Assembly, students from the University of Alberta spring session. These students come from the four corners of the province, and are an embodiment of that old maxim, you're only old when you stop learning. Mr. Speaker, we have with us 20 students in the public gal­ lery. They are senior citizens studying at the university's spring session for seniors. head: MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Department of Agriculture MR. SCHMIDT: Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to announce today the details of an Alberta emergency stop-loss pro­ gram for hogs. In response to the emergency situation in the hog industry, and in recognition of the hardships confronting producers, this government will institute a temporary stop-loss stabilization program for hogs of Alberta origin. This program will be effective from April 1, 1980, to March 31, 1981, and payments by this government will represent a commitment of approximately $25 million to Alberta's hog industry. Mr.

Speaker, it was decided this action was necessary to restore confidence and prevent erosion of the industry, due to the negative impact of low producer prices and increased production costs. I wish to emphasize that this is a short-term program, and that Alberta will continue to work with the federal government and with other prov­ inces with respect to the development of a meaningful level of stabilization on a national level, which will in­ volve producer participation.

The Alberta [emergency] stop-loss program for hogs will ensure that a standard hog carcass, which is defined as a 170-pound carcass, indexing the 1979 grade average of 101 and priced at the average weekly price, will yield a return of $35 per hog over the calculated feed cost pre­ vailing in that month. Feed costs will be revised monthly, in order to account for fluctuations in barley and sup­ plement prices.

Based on a preliminary feed cost estimate of $65.09 per hog marketed in April, 1980, and the guaranteed return above feed costs of $35 per hog, the program would support total returns during April to a level of $100.09 per standard hog carcass. Payments to producers will be made when market re­ turns fail to cover calculated feed cost plus $35. The actual level of the support payment will vary, depending upon the difference between returns for the standard hog carcass in any given week and the assured return of $35 above the feed cost prevailing at that point in time.

Payments to producers will be calculated weekly and disbursed monthly. The program will cover hogs of Al­ berta origin, with the exception of light hogs — that is, those less than 90-pound carcass weight — sows, and boars; and will be retroactive to April 1, 1980. Hogs sold under Japanese contracts E 50 and E 55 will be covered if the returns above feed costs fall below the $35 level guaranteed under this program. While the support payment will not be adjusted by the grade index received, adjustments will be made for car­ cass weight.

Heavier hog carcasses will receive a propor­ tionately higher support payment, while lighter carcasses of course will receive proportionately lower support pay­ ments than the standard 170-pound carcass. The program also makes provision for hogs sold on a live-weight basis. The same support payment per hundredweight of dressed pork will apply. The conversion from live to dressed weight will be based on a dressing percentage of 78 per cent. In

summary, Mr. Speaker, the program is a temporary emergency stop-loss provision, effective April 1, 1980 and will extend to March 31, 1981. The program will guaran­ tee a return above feed cost of $35 per hog. Feed costs will be revised monthly, in order to account for fluctua­ tions in barley and supplement prices. Further details with respect to program administration, claims proce­ dures, et cetera, will be forthcoming shortly. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, the program I have an­ nounced today represents this government's strong and continuing commitment to agriculture in Alberta.

The program is a temporary measure to support the hog industry, which remains under government review with the objective of establishing a long-term plan for the marketing of hogs in this province. DR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could have the permission of the Assembly to indicate that Mrs. Kay Sauder is in fact included in the introduction of guests accompanying the Coralwood Junior Academy school. I'd like to have that entered in Hansard in the appropri­ ate area. Thank you. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Research Council of Alberta MR. R. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct the first question to the Minister of Environment or the Minister responsible for Workers' Health, Safety and Compensa­ tion. Is there an ongoing monitoring of the way hazar­ dous materials are handled at the Alberta Research Council by either the Department of Environment or the Minister responsible for Workers' Health, Safety and Compensation? MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, from time to time my officials are consulted by other departments — Housing and Public Works, or people from some of the other divisions.

Possibly my colleague the Minister of Housing and Public Works may have something more to answer that question. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion. Is either hon. minister in a position to indicate to the Assembly whether the Alberta Research Council asked for and received the advice of the minister's de­

May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 885 partment on the question of the handling of wastes or organic compounds at the Research Council? MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, I don't have any infor­ mation on it today, but I'll take that question as notice. MR. R. CLARK: Perhaps I might pose a supplementary question to the hon.

Member for Calgary McKnight, who is accountable for the Research Council, and ask the minister — the hon. member; would-be minister — to indicate to the Assembly what steps the Alberta Research Council has taken to deal with what I'm led to believe has been an extremely dangerous situation for the Alberta Research Council, from the standpoint of handling a variety of chemicals and organic compounds. MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. Leader of the Opposition appreciates, doing scientific work involves a certain amount of hazard at any time.

Last fall I took it upon myself to visit the facilities; and while I was not aware of any hazard existing, I was concerned about the crowded conditions. Early this year the hon. Minister of Government Services and I reviewed all the facilities in the Edmonton area. We were concerned about some of the existing conditions — primarily crowding, it appeared to us. This year as a result of the long-range plan, we hired a person to be responsible for facilities, effective the first of the year. They arranged to have them reviewed.

We engaged consultants from the university and the Depart­ ment of Housing and Public Works to review the facili­ ties. We have removed all the hazardous material. We have taken the people who were engaged in what was considered hazardous work and employed them else­ where. We now feel we have met all the requirements of the city fire department, occupational health, and the building standards branch of the provincial government. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. member. Where are those hazardous materials now being stored? MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, I can't tell the hon. member where they're being stored.

My understanding is that they have been removed from the building. There were some fume hoods that were particularly dangerous. I understand they have been removed and buried in a sanitary pit somewhere. I can find out exactly where for the hon. leader if he wishes. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. Member for Calgary McKnight or the Minis­ ter responsible for Workers' Health, Safety and Compen­ sation.

What ongoing medical examinations have been made available to those staff at the Research Council who would be working especially in coal technology, gas technology, and with organic compounds? What ongoing evaluation of the health of those people is done? MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, I'd have to take that question under advisement. I can advise the hon. Leader of the Opposition, though, that we have established a new safety program. We've appointed a new director, and at a recent meeting of the full council of the Research Council we adopted a policy as to the care and working condi­ tions of our people.

It has been not in force for many, many years, and it is part of our new thrust under the long-range plan — one of the first concerns Dr. Cloutier had was that the working conditions of our employees should be safe. To answer the specific question regarding a periodic review of health, I would have to take that under advisement and report back to the House. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might ask one further question of either hon. gentleman.

In report­ ing back to the Assembly, could the hon. gentlemen indicate to the Assembly whether there has in fact been a co-ordinated program of health safety at the council, again from the standpoint of people working in the three areas I outlined: coal technology, gas technology, and the work with organic chemicals? I raise the question because some people are concerned that they have health prob­ lems as a result of having worked at the Research Coun­ cil, some for as long as 18 years, and there is no ongoing annual medical checkup. MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr.

Speaker, as we become more informed, it's obvious that all of us are becoming more concerned about these kinds of health hazards. Chemists and researchers who have been at the council for a number of years consider it no problem,

whereas the younger professional people are more conscious of the liabilities that might exist if health hazards are not monitored. I will certainly look into it for the hon. leader and report back to him. Forest Fires MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct the second question to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. It concerns the forest fires in the northern part of the province, primarily the fire in the Lac La Biche forest area which was caused by the crash of military aircraft.

In light of the forestry situation, did the province at any time consider asking the federal government either to scale down or not go ahead with the training programs that were going on in the forestry area? MR. LEITCH: Yes, Mr. Speaker, discussions have been held between forestry personnel and military personnel regarding the level of activity in those exercises. At the moment I don't recall whether those discussions took place before the incident the hon. leader refers to, but certainly I know that discussions have taken place since that time.

As I recall, the result of those discussions is that there will be a curtailment of some of the activities, particularly those that create a fire hazard. MR. R. CLARK: A supplementary to the hon. minister. Is the minister in a position to indicate if it's now been established by the Alberta forestry service that the major fire in the weapons range was caused by the crash? And is the minister in a position to indicate a ballpark figure as to the cost of controlling the fire? MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't be able to give any information with respect to the latter question.

I would think that ought to be a matter for the Order Paper, because I'm sure it would involve some detail. With respect to establishing the cause of the fire, Mr. Speaker, as I recall there were two airplane crashes. I believe each caused a fire, although I can't call to memory precisely which fire was caused by which crash. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. minister. Does the minister or his department have information as to the cause of the fire designated as DND 4, which is

886 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 also near the Primrose weapons range, and which has already burnt over 200,000 acres of land? I raise the question because it's been drawn to my attention that the fire was also ignited as a result of the weapon practising going on. MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I'm not familiar with the letter designation of the few hundred fires that have occurred in the province to date. So I'm not at all sure that my response can relate to that precise fire, although there has been some speculation and discussion over whether a significant fire was caused by military aircraft manoeuvres.

I don't know that I could go further on the information I have received to date than to say there's been some speculation that a manoeuvre of aircraft tak­ ing

part in those exercises did start a fire, although I think the speculation is disputed by the military personnel. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the minister then, just to take the matter perhaps one step further. In addition to the fires started as a result of the crashes, it's now the feeling of forestry officials that some of the other fires that started in that area during the time the manoeuvres were going on were as a result of military manoeuvres? MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, that's accurate in the sense that some members of the department expressed the view that the fire was started in that way.

But I'd hoped I'd left it clear in my earlier answer that that question was open to argument, and some contrary views were being expressed. MR. STROMBERG: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. Since the surface rights — the timber on the Primrose bombing range is owned by the federal government, who is paying for the cost of extin­ guishing this fire, the province or the federal government? MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to check on the basis upon which the hon. member's question rests; name­ ly, that the surface rights in the Primrose range are owned by the federal government.

Possibly it's merely a matter of leasing, not ownership, but I would like to check on that. As to the actual costs of the fire-fighting, Mr. Speaker, there would be two elements there. One is who pays the costs at the time they're incurred, and I'm quite confident that is the provincial government, because you can't wait until you've sorted out responsibility to incur the ex­ penses to fight the fire. But after the fire is out and we have the time to look at the matter of responsibility and who ought to be paying the costs, I'm sure we'll do that. MR. STROMBERG: A further supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

Since the federal government is the lessee of this land, has consideration been given to asking that the federal armed forces currently at the Primrose bombing range be also involved in forest firefighting? MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I'm not aware of that having been done, but it could have been. I'll certainly check into it and respond later to the hon. member. Blind Persons with Seeing-eye Dogs MR. LITTLE: Mr. Speaker, may I address my question to the hon. Minister of Social Services and Community Health. Mr.

Minister, two situations have recently come to my attention involving blind persons who were refused service because they were accompanied by seeing-eye dogs. One involved rental property, and the other re­ staurant service. Therefore, would the minister consider the possibility of preparing and issuing identification cards to all blind persons in the province with seeing-eye dogs, having on the reverse side of the card the pertinent or significant portions of the blind persons' seeing-eye dog Act, so that when these people run into this problem, they cannot be refused on a situation of ignorance of the law? MR.

BOGLE: Mr. Speaker, I'll undertake to conduct some discussions with officials of the Canadian National Institute for the Blind in the province to determine what we might do in conjunction with that organization to improve the communication from blind people who have seeing-eye dogs to landlords, restaurateurs, or others. I think the suggestion the hon. member has put forward, a plasticized card with information on it relating to the legislation as well as the proper identification, is very good.

I'd like to leave the question in the sense that I'll consult with the organization and see if there's a way we can assist the CNIB to provide such information. If that's not possible, I'll look for some other avenue to ensure that the 50 or so Albertans, I believe, who have seeing-eye dogs are protected, as the hon. member has suggested. Constitutional Change DR. PAPROSKI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A question to the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs, further to a debate in this Assembly on October 20, 1976, on a resolution dealing with the constitution and its repatriation.

At that time I and many other members supported that resolution, of course, and it was agreed on by this Assembly. I wonder if the minister would indicate to the House whether Alberta's position regarding the constitution and its repatriation has changed since that time. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Ed­ monton Kingsway is accurate. This Assembly did deal with the question of the patriation of the constitution in October 1976.

I think it's fair to say there was very strong support for the position articulated, which was that in matters of proprietary interest, the jurisdiction of the province, or existing rights of the province, no amending process should change that fundamental right of the prov­ ince, and I think the provinces agreed to be consulted on any changes. That memorandum was also sent to the Prime Minister, and formed much of the amending pro­ cess which this House dealt with in Harmony in Diversity.

It should be noted that in subsequent debates in this Assembly, particularly on the Harmony in Diversity pa­ per, there was some discussion which would suggest that if an amending formula could not be determined and there was proper consultation, if patriation did take place and the constitution was brought back to Canada, it would be agreed that the unanimity rule would apply; that is, no change would take place in the constitution unless all provinces consented to it. At this point, Mr. Speaker, that is still the position of the province of Alberta.

May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 887 MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. Is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly whether any suggestions have been made by the Prime Minister or officials of the federal government with respect to the Prime Minister's statement the other day that should the "no" forces win, the federal govern­ ment will call an early constitutional conference? Have we received any formal notification as yet? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, we have not received any formal communication. I guess, as the hon.

Member for Spirit River-Fairview has done, we sort of detect a feeling of support for a constitutional conference soon after the referendum. In fact that was the position taken by the western premiers in Lethbridge on April 21 and 22. In our unity communique we indicated that we would support and urge the calling of a constitutional confer­ ence soon after the referendum is settled. But specifically, we have not received any direct request or any timetable as to when a constitutional conference could be called: MR. KNAAK: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. Will the minister be responding in any way to the motion by a former member of this House that was passed the other day in the federal Parliament? Will the minister be responding or directing any communication with regard to that motion? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, as I understand the standing order, which is just before the question period in the federal House, although it was passed unanimously by that House it doesn't really have any effect on the House. I think it was an indication of good will.

Of course I will take the opportunity to discuss both the standing order and the Bill which our hon. colleague Mr. Yurko brought forward in the federal Parliament. I think he has put in context the need for constitutional change. Certainly I think that was the notion or the view express­ ed through most of the debates I've read to date. I think we will be following that up with him. Hog Marketing Review Committee MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct this ques­ tion to the hon. Minister of Agriculture. It's a follow-up to a question I put last Thursday.

Is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly this afternoon whether the Foster committee has recommended for ministerial approval the hiring of a consulting firm which will be using the contracted services of Mr. Jack Hanmer, the former general manager of Swift Canadian; Mr. Bruce Robertson, the former general manager of Canada Pack­ ers in Edmonton and one of those listed in the statement of claim of the Alberta Pork Producers' Marketing Board; and Mr. L. Worsdale, a former executive with Burns Foods? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr. Speaker, I've received no request from the independent review board. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. Is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly whether the Foster committee has itself recommended the engagement of this particular contract­ ing firm? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr. Speaker, any recommendation for hiring a firm to aid in the total review in whatever capacity would certainly be made to me, and I have received nothing to date. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister.

Is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly whether a meeting is scheduled for later this week with the Foster committee to consider the merits of this particular recommendation, and whether the depart­ ment is reviewing any other possible consultants? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr. Speaker, I'm not aware of any set date, but certainly it's not impossible that a meeting would be scheduled for the end of the week. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister.

Is the minister in a position to inform the Assembly whether any set guidelines were established by the Foster committee when they solicited among the contracting industry, if you like, for a possible consulting firm to assist them? Were any specific guide­ lines offered? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr. Speaker, the guidelines under which the independent review is operating are few and certainly are public knowledge.

Any expenditure of funds for the hiring of either an individual or a group of individuals to carry out any work tied directly with the independent review of course would have to have the sanction of my department and, indeed, my signature. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the last supplementary on this topic. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, is the minister in a position to inform the House whether he has received informally any information pertaining to the recommendation from the Foster committee [interjections] — oh yes, it most certainly is — concerning the engagement of this particu­ lar consulting firm, with the back-up of the three gentle­ men I referred to. MR. SPEAKER: With great respect, it would seem to the Chair that when a request is made to find out about a communication, that covers formal, informal, and semi- formal ones. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.

The minister said he'd received no formal communication; my question is whether there has been any informal commun­ ication to the government. MR. SCHMIDT: Mr. Speaker, I have received no communication, either formal or informal, from the in­ dependent review in that regard. Hog Marketing — Subsidies MR. MANDEVILLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture is with regard to the announcement he made today on a support price for hogs. Could the minister indicate if there will be a maximum on the number of hogs one producer can market and still qualify for the subsidy? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr.

Speaker, there are no limits. Of course the major portion of the hog industry numberwise

888 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 are tied to producers who produce less than 200 hogs a year. Of course the cost factor of production is basically the same in that proportion, whether one is marketing 50 or three. It's really an opportunity to stop-loss an indus­ try that is producing a product at a greater price than its return. MR. MANDEVILLE: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. The minister indicated that the hogs going to Japan would qualify for the subsidy up to the $35. Would anyone marketing their hogs in the United States or other countries qualify for the same subsidy? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr.

Speaker, the export market is of course dependent upon the price of that basic commodity falling below the feed cost factor plus the $35. To my knowledge, no contracts exist at the present time at that particular figure. MR. MANDEVILLE: One further supplementary ques­ tion, Mr. Speaker. Do they have to be registered produc­ ers in order to qualify? Another question: the minister indicated that it would be down to 90 pounds. Did I understand that to be a 90-pound carcass that would qualify, or is it slaughter only that's going to qualify for the subsidy? MR. SCHMIDT: Mr.

Speaker, the basic program is tied to honor the production of marketable hogs within this province. The hogs throughout this province are all marketed through the hog marketing board, either direct­ ly through it or accountable to it. All those hogs would qualify for the $35 basic subsidy over and above the cost of feed, as long as the price received for the hog itself made the individual qualify. MR. SPEAKER: I should express my regret to the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview for my intervention of a few moments ago.

If the hon. minister in fact used the word "formal" in his answer, then of course the supple­ mentary was perfectly in order. 75th Anniversary — Medallions MR. LYSONS: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my ques­ tion to the Minister of Government Services. The ques­ tion deals with application forms for people to receive either gold or silver medallions. Apparently some people haven't got the applications. Do you have new applica­ tion forms for those that are lost? MR. McCRAE: Mr. Speaker, a number of application forms have not yet been returned by those who had them mailed to them.

Yes, we are preparing a second set of forms, and we hope to have them out very shortly. MR. LYSONS: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question, please. Would the minister explain to the House how those people over 65 would receive the scrolls? Further to that, when will the medallions and scrolls be available for distribution? MR. McCRAE: Mr. Speaker, we hope to have the whole package ready for distribution about September 1, which is the birthday date. The distribution of the scrolls would be by mail. No application form is required; we simply intend to mail them out to the people who are entitled to them.

I should say as well that they will be personalized and beautiful scrolls. MR. GOGO: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the hon. minister. In view of the fact that there could be an interruption in postal service in the near future, would the minister give consideration to putting additional adver­ tisements in Alberta weekly and daily papers? MR. McCRAE: Mr. Speaker, we've given some thought to that already, and suspect that two things are happen­ ing. First of all, a lot of them have come back — upwards of 50,000.

Secondly, we think the good news is travelling fast by word of mouth, and people who have not received application forms at this date will do so through relatives, friends, MLAs, or whatever. We really had not consid­ ered, in a positive sense, advertising, at least to this date. Private Schools MR. OMAN: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Education. On Friday last, the hon. Member for Vegreville inquired about private schools. I believe the minister replied by saying that two — type 1 and type 4 — are recognized by the government.

What backup in­ formation does the department require in order to recog­ nize these schools? What is required of them to get recognition from the department? MR. SPEAKER: With great respect to the hon. member, this would appear to be a question that might require considerable detail. If the minister knows otherwise and thinks it can be answered briefly, perhaps we could deal with it now. MR. KING: I'll try something unusual, Mr. Speaker; I will try to answer briefly. If the hon. member isn't satis­ fied, he can speak with me informally afterwards for more detail.

Class 1 private schools are characterized by the fact that they receive financial support from the provincial government. In order to be accredited, if you will, as class 1 private schools, you must apply to the Department of Education. Your program must be basically the curricu­ lum approved by Alberta Education. Your building must comply with all the requirements of health and safety authorities; for example, The Public Health Act is called upon. You must use certificated teachers.

In terms of education, instruction is provided by certificated teachers and the curriculum is the approved curriculum of Alberta Education. Those are class 1 private schools. Type 4 private schools are the result of what is known as the Linden Mennonite court case. They are approved by the Department of Education following application to the Department of Education, but the instructors in such schools need not be certificated teachers. The curriculum does not have to be the curriculum of Alberta Education, although it must be approved by the Minister of Educa­ tion.

As I said on Friday, type 4 private schools do not receive any funding from the provincial government. MR. OMAN: A supplementary to the minister, Mr. Speaker. My concern is that because of unwarranted motives, or feeling that this is a good thing, someone may get a program together and for personal reasons of gain apply to the Department of Education for a licence or for recognition. While I'm in favor of private schools, I wonder if the department has safeguards to protect the

May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 889 public from someone who might be registered with the department and therefore get confidence because of that. MR. KING: We evaluate all applications made to the department for either type 1 or type 4 private schools. In the process of that evaluation, we attempt to establish and maintain safeguards such as I think the hon. member is alluding to. However, the other side of that coin is that the process of education is extremely sensitive, as it is touched by the right of parents to decide the kind of education their children will receive.

Other than to say that we attempt to maintain a system of safeguards, I can only say that it's a very sensitive issue and, therefore, I don't think anyone is ever satisfied with the extent to which we are successful in maintaining safeguards that are satisfactory; that is to say, we don't think the safeguards are always sufficient, and others believe that the safeguards are too stringent. MR. LYSONS: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister, and I'd like his usual brief reply.

What happens to the balance of the funding normally set aside for funding municipalities when these private schools are set up? MR. KING: We provide compensatory funding to the school board within whose jurisdiction a private school is established. That compensatory funding is available to them for two years from the date at which the private school begins operating. Highway Traffic Act MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Transportation.

Questions have been raised about regulations described in a pamph­ let recently released by his department concerning lights, markings, et cetera, for agricultural equipment in transit, both day and night. I wonder if the minister would enlighten the House as to the circumstances that gave rise to these apparent changes in requirements. MR. KROEGER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, last year we did develop what I took to be some relatively minor changes in The Highway Traffic Act. In summarizing the related safety factors and putting together an information piece, the document went back over a period of almost 12 years.

This was swept into the whole explanation and converted into a requirement. The requirement creating most of the problems for us is, for example, the stop lights on equipment. Because it's creating a considerable problem, I have now asked the department people to hold this until we can review it. We've notified the enforcement officers to ignore this pamphlet until we have a review. MRS. OSTERMAN: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Has the minister an answer from the enforcement officers as to whether they will co-operate with this request? MR. R. CLARK: He's the minister. MR. KROEGER: No, Mr. Speaker, I have not.

Oldman River — ECA Report MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Environment. I wonder what further informa­ tion the minister is waiting for at the present time with regard to the ECA report and recommendations on the Oldman River, so that an announcement could be made in this Legislature and we could have a discussion with regard to the minister's announcement. MR. COOKSON: Mr. Speaker, I think it would be safe to say today that no further information is really needed. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques­ tion to the minister, and a very obvious one.

What is the date set for the announcement, so that we can know what the government is doing in that area? MR. COOKSON: Mr. Speaker, I think that it's fair to say that I made a commitment this spring to make a statement with regard to the report, and I'm going to try to be consistent. Mind you, this is an early spring, so I should have just a little extension on that period of time. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, to the minister. Does the minister still intend to make the announcement in the Legislature prior to the completion of this current ses­ sion?

I know there is some flexibility about the end date, and if we have to delay the session for that report, the minister should give us notification. MR. COOKSON: Again, Mr. Speaker, I guess it depends a lot on how long we talk in here, and that's something over which I have very little control. I try to keep it as restricted as possible. [interjection] But we have problems from other parts of the House over which I have no control. I could only hazard a guess that we may be through the spring session before I'm able to make an official statement. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, supplementary to the minister.

Could the minister clarify for the Legislature: if all the information is in and the minister has already made the decision, why can't the announcement be made public in this Legislature? I just can't follow the delay at the present time. MR. NOTLEY: It might trigger a debate. MR. COOKSON: That's no problem, Mr. Speaker. All the information is in, but I haven't made my decision. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, that may be the problem. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition, followed by the hon. Provincial Treasurer, who wishes to supplement some information. Research Council of Alberta (continued) MR. R.

CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to go back to the question to the Member for Calgary McKnight, answera­ ble for the Research Council. I'd put my question from this point of view: could the member indicate to the Assembly whether there is a compulsory medical ex­ amination every six months or every period of time for employees of the Research Council who work in areas where there is potential for health problems? MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, as I tried to indicate before, and I guess I didn't make myself clear, I'm not

890 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 aware of what our program is on that particular matter. But I will find out and report back to the hon. leader. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. member. When the member reports back to the Assembly, could he also make available to the House a copy of the guidelines the Research Council follows with regard to medical examinations for personnel in those areas I re­ ferred to? Might I also ask the hon. member if he could indicate to the Assembly the purpose of the P.S.

Ross and Woods, Gordon reports on the administration of the Research Council, which are in the process of being prepared or have just been prepared. MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, I will report back to the hon. member on the medical program. I would have to take the other matter under advise­ ment. It's primarily an administrative study which was made to help us reorganize the Research Council in view of the long-range plan. Municipal Finances MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday the hon. Member for Little Bow asked three questions. I promised I would secure further information.

The first one related to the municipal water and sewer treatment grant program. This is the first full year of this program, which has proven more popular than was pre­ dicted. Members will recall that the previous program was a debt-shielding program. When the budget prepara­ tion took place this year, the degree of popularity of the new program was unknown; $22 million was allocated, and in fact that has already been applied for. That's a 16.5 per cent increase over last year.

As this program is really an aspect of the balanced growth policies of the government, it appears it is more successful than antici­ pated, and a special warrant will be raised before long. Treasury Branches MR. HYNDMAN: Secondly, a question was posed by the hon. member with respect to the treasury branch, whether a customer who was coming over to the treasury branch for the first time was required by the branch to bring all his or her accounts. That is correct, and the practice parallels that in the banking community general­ ly.

I would stress that the policy is practical and reasona­ ble in the sense that there has to be support and protec­ tion of the deposit base of any financial institution to maintain a loaning program. Therefore that policy is car­ ried through. The third question related to a printed contract which shows, when a customer of the treasury branch takes out a loan, that the rate slightly above prime is applicable,

whereas I had indicated that a rate for businessmen and farmers of 0.5 per cent below prime was the case. It is the latter preferred rate, 0.5 per cent below prime, which applies. The policy is of course in effect during this period of high and unstable interest rates. The standard loan contract, though — which has been the case in months past and which has been printed for many months ahead — does indicate that the prime rate plus will apply. This procedure is in effect a convenience to the cus­ tomer, because re-signing of the documents would be required as the interest rates moved up and down.

In fact, though, any time any customer would check, he would find that preferred rate of 0.5 per cent below prime. That sheltering is still occurring. MR. R. CLARK: A supplementary question to the Pro­ vincial Treasurer. It flows from the last answer the Treas­ urer gave the Assembly. What is the government's present consideration on the question of interest rates, and the decline which every member of the Assembly is pleased to see? With the loan agreements that customers sign at the treasury branch, some uncertainty has been expressed to me as to how long the government might stay in the program.

Of course, if the government were to pull out of the program of shielding for small business and agricul­ ture — a very good program, as we've previously said from this side of the House — those two groups would find themselves not getting a preferred 0.5 per cent below prime, but in fact going up to 1.5 per cent above prime, which is indicated in the loan agreements. What is the stage of the government's thinking as to the continuation of that program? Is there any thought at all of moving out of that program, in light of what's happen­ ing to interest rates? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr.

Speaker, the program was an­ nounced last fall on the basis that interest rates at that time were climbing to 14, 15, 16 per cent. It was felt appropriate to have a policy which rifled in assistance and support for those two groups, farmers and small businessmen, while those unstable and very high rates were in effect. Therefore, if the interest rates continue to drop as they have over the past four weeks, through the level — and I believe it was in the range of 13 per cent — above which the special plan was put into effect, then the special provisions would cease to apply and we'd be back to a normal situation.

We would of course review the impact of the program at that time. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the House would agree to let me deal with a minor procedural matter. It has come to my attention that those who have directed their minds to it have succeeded in finding a way in which we can rise and report from Committee of Supply once today rather than twice; rather than calling you back at 5:29, Mr. Speaker.

On that basis, I move that when Committee of Supply has been called, the House stand adjourned until the Committee of Supply rises and reports. [Motion carried] head: GOVERNMENT MOTIONS head: (Committee of Supply) [Mr. Appleby in the Chair] MR. CHAIRMAN: The Committee of Supply will please come to order.

May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 891 Department of Housing and Public Works 1.0.1 — Minister's Office MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, I recognize a sizable amount of debate has gone on and I've had a chance to peruse Hansard, so I don't propose to dwell on an area that has already been discussed. But I note just a passing reference from the minister with regard to the building project we see to the north of the building. I'm one of those who is perhaps not nearly as impressed with the need for the project as people on the government side of the House obviously are. Mr.

Minister, last year there was considerable discus­ sion in the committee about the total cost of the project. I would appreciate an update as to the cost estimates and the completion date. I've heard the rumble around the building that the project is some six months ahead of time. If that's the case, I'm sure the minister would be pleased to tell us. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, I wouldn't say the project is that much ahead of time. However, it is pro­ gressing very well and, I think, will certainly be finished at least on

schedule and also on cost. I believe the original projected cost was about $43 million in '79 dol­ lars. The last check I had shows it's tracking quite well on that original estimate. Again, the work is progressing very favorably. I think it will look very beautiful indeed a couple of years from now. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, might I pose one fur­ ther area to the minister. Reference was also made to the Administration Building and the Natural Resources Building, that they're nearly completed. Mr.

Minister, what are the figures as to the cost of the work that has gone on at the Administration Building and the Natural Resources Building? I noticed in my quick perusal of Hansard just before I came into the House this afternoon that reference was made, if I read it correctly, that the Treasury people who would be implementing the new provincial corporate in­ come tax scheme would be taking over a sizable portion of the Administration Building. Is that so? What are the government's plans for facilities in those two buildings, other than the Department of the Attorney General? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr.

Chairman, that's correct. I be­ lieve the Natural Resources Building is scheduled for completion in June this year, and the Administration Building about September. As the hon. leader indicated, a sizable piece of that will be occupied by the corporate tax group. As regards the renovation cost numbers, I have them somewhere. I might be able to locate them during the next while, or perhaps the numbers might be sent down to me. MR. R. CLARK: Mr.

Chairman, pursuing this question of the use of the Administration Building, is the minister in a position to indicate: are we looking at about four or five of however many floors there are in the Administra­ tion Building being used by the corporate tax people, or half the building, or what? MR. CHAMBERS: Again, I'd have to check on that, Mr. Chairman. But I'm pleased to do that. Perhaps I can get the answer in a very short while. Agreed to: 1.0.1 — Minister's Office $132,000 1.0.2 — Deputy Minister of Public Works $142,000 1.0.3 — Deputy Minister of Housing MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr.

Chairman, on this vote for the Deputy Minister of Housing. It's an increase of 243 per cent. Could the minister outline briefly what the large increase is for? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, it should be observed that while the percentage is high, the numerical increase isn't really that large. It reflects a number of items, but one of them is that we now have in place a full Deputy Minister of Housing MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. What role will the Deputy Minister of Housing play?

Will the deputy minister in fact really be the co-ordinating person for the Housing Corporation and the Home Mortgage Corporation in the overall planning of the department? Is that the particular role, and is that the office Mr. Murray Rasmusson fills? If it is, Mr. Minister, it was a good choice. MR. CHAMBERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the hon. leader for his comments. I certainly agree. Primarily, the department plays a policy and planning role. In addition, a substantial role is the grants pro­ grams, whether it be the pioneers' repair or rural home assistance.

Any of the grants programs are operated through the department, as is essentially the bulk of the planning and research, and that sort of co-ordination. Agreed to: 1.0.3 — Deputy Minister of Housing $94,000 1.0.4 — Administrative Support $1,399,000 Total Vote 1 — Departmental Support Services $1,767,000 Vote 2 — Operation and Maintenance of Waterlines MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask one question, and a comment in this area. I'd be less than fair if I didn't say that the Red Deer regional waterline has been a real boon to the area, much of which happens to be in the constituency of Olds-Didsbury.

Having said that, Mr. Minister, could I get some indication as to the department's long-range plan? I hear rumblings that the government would now like to look very seriously at the local municipalities taking a role different from my un­ derstanding of the initial role when Mr. Yurko outlined the program. What is the long-range plan for the opera­ tion of the program? Will we continue to see an appro­ priation like this, or is it the government's intention that before long all the costs will be borne by the communities involved? Mr.

Minister, I would go on and ask about the talk we've had in the Assembly with regard to a waterline east of Edmonton. We now have a number of regional water- lines in the Edmonton region. Is the government moving to a standard policy, if I could call it that, which would affect any area across the province, where a number of communities can band together and perhaps make an

892 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 approach like was made for the Red Deer line, or the one that's gone north and west of the city of Edmonton? Is there a move in that direction? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, I should point out that these two waterlines are the only such lines operated by the Department of Housing and Public Works. Water programs in general, of course, are under the Department of Environment. I believe the goal would be that a regional water board would be established in due course, and I assume that my colleague the Minister of Environ­ ment is reviewing that aspect of the handling of these systems.

I believe Airdrie also has applied, or is designing a second line from Calgary for its own purposes, and they would be tendering that later this summer. Agreed to: Total Vote 2 — Operation and Maintenance of Waterlines $900,000 MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm grateful I heard at least one voice when I put the question. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. Agreed to: Vote 3 — Planning and Acquisition of Accommodation 3.1 — Administrative Support $3,225,000 3.2 — Provision of General Purpose Space $49,970,000 3.3 — Grants in Lieu of Taxes $11,500.000 3.4 — Telecommunications MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, to the minister.

Is this where we find the RITE system and the efforts being made to right the RITE system? If so, what are they? MR. CHAMBERS: That would be correct, Mr. Chairman. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. I note the recommendations in the Auditor General's report. I think the Auditor General's findings were anything but flattering as to the way that system had operated, espe­ cially with regard to its abuse. I also note something like a 31 per cent increase in Vote 3.4. Mr.

Minister, I think it's fair to ask: one, what steps have been taken; secondly, to what use are we going to put the 31 per cent increase as far as next year is con­ cerned? Is it directly as a result of the Auditor General's recommendations, or are there some other wrinkles we haven't heard about yet? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, perhaps it might be useful if I gave the hon. leader and members a breakdown of that item.

If you look at the increase from last year, the $4.14 million, the first item would be new equipment, including installation, cost of upgrading existing services, tenant improvement projects, capital construction, total­ ling $0.75 million; rental costs for telecommunication projects, tenant improvement, and capital construction, $0.58 million.

Inflation amounts to $1.58 million, a study of mobile radio communication systems, $100,000; the full year rental costs for equipment installed during the '79-80 year, [$640,000]; equipment upgrading required by Edmonton Telephones and Alberta Government Tele­ phones, $490,000. That would be the total. I mentioned earlier — in response to a question in the House, I think — that the automatic monitoring system had been installed and was operative, I believe, from March 1.

It records not only where the call goes but the origin of the call as well, therefore allowing the sort of control the Auditor General recommended. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. What is the purpose of the $100,000 mobile equipment study? Is it just dealing with the RITE system, or within government agencies, to be able to respond on a mobile basis across the province? It would seem to me that on a far broader basis that kind of study would come under AGT rather than Public Works. How come Public Works is involved in that kind of . . . MR. CHAMBERS: I don't know, Mr.

Chairman, but I'll be happy to find out and report back, hopefully fairly soon. Agreed to: 3.4 — Telecommunications $17,315,000 Total Vote 3 — Planning and Acquisition of Accommodation $82,010,000 Vote 4 — Planning and Implementation of Construction Projects MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure if this is where I should bring this up, but the Auditor General made some recommendations to the Department of Housing and Public Works as a result of the detailed examination, begun in 1978, of the realty and accommo­ dation division of the department.

In a number of cases, there were overpayments and instances of amounts due that had not been collected. Up till August '79, the divi­ sion's review and recovery efforts had resulted in reco­ veries in excess of $600,000. My question to the minister, Mr. Chairman: what has the minister done in relation to the recommendations in the Auditor's report? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, those are good ques­ tions. We found the Auditor's report very useful, and all his recommendations in those areas have been imple­ mented.

We have in effect acquired more positions for the realty and accommodation division, and have beefed that

section up in terms of numbers of people, in order to be able to effect the sort of control the Auditor General advises. Agreed to: 4.1 — Administrative Support $7,301,000 4.2 — Advanced Education and Manpower $25,136,000 4.3 — Agriculture $910,000 4.4 — Attorney General $33,028,000 4.5 — Tourism and Small Business $275,000 46 — Culture $903,000 4.7 — Energy and Natural Resources $10,231,000 4.8 — Environment $1,553,000 4.9 — Executive Council $3,345,000 4.10 — Government Services $753,000 4.11 — Education $750,000 4.12 — Labour $550,000 4.13 — Recreation and Parks $10,774,000 4.14 — Social Services and Community

May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 893 Health $19,597,000 4.15 — Solicitor General $14,299,000 4.16 — Transportation $3,320,000 4.17 — Housing and Public Works — Multiple Use Facilities $71,591,000 4.18 — Multi-Departmental Services $1,000,000 Total Vote 4 — Planning and Implementation of Construction Projects $205,316,000 5.1 — Policy and Program Development $1,181,000 5.2 — Housing Assistance $2,283,000 5.3 — Financial Assistance for Housing $47,910,000 Total Vote 5 — Policy Development and Financial Assistance for Housing $51,374,000 Vote 6 — Housing for Albertans 6.1 — Program Support $8,575,000 6.2 — Staff Housing ($1,261,000) 6.3 — Subsidized Housing for Low Income Albertans MR.

GOGO: Mr. Chairman, is this the vote that the monthly subsidies for low-income Albertans come under? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, is the member refer­ ring to the family home purchase program, for example? Yes. MR. GOGO: Mr. Chairman, I raised the matter last Friday, and the minister responded. I appreciate his re­ sponding to my concerns about Albertans wishing to assume mortgages that are issued by the Alberta Home Mortgage Corporation. I made reference to some of the costs that were involved.

I saw in a publication just the other day that the MLS price for the average house sold in Calgary is now $87,500, and in Edmonton, $81,000. The maximum program we have in Alberta is $63,000 for new and $53,000 for an existing home. I wonder if the minister would comment whether they are now in the process of being reviewed. The other point I want to mention, Mr. Chairman, is with reference to young Albertans acquiring housing. On Friday I made reference to costs.

I simply want to reiter­ ate that they're faced with costs such as the mortgage application fee of $35, and the appraisal fee of $100 to $125, if it's an existing property. The mortgage company may or may not want a survey certificate issued. I would hope that's not mandatory in all cases, but that's about $100. The average legal fee is $500. The mortgage insur­ ance fee is 1 per cent of the total amount of that mortgage, payable over its life-span. Again, Mr.

Chairman, I think much of this cost could be avoided, particularly for young Albertans acquiring their first property, if they could assume an existing mortgage. I understand that once a mortgage is issued, the mortgage company has virtually no control over subsequent ownership of that mortgage. Legally, I think there are reservations in the document that subsequent purchasers must be approved by the original issuer or owner of that mortgage.

We now require that for some­ body who wishes to sell to a prospective buyer a house mortgaged by the Alberta Home Mortgage Corporation, there's a three-month penalty in terms of getting out of that mortgage in order to have someone else take it over. Obviously, the new purchaser has to pay that. It would appear to me, Mr. Chairman, that a policy could be developed whereby many of these costs could be looked at.

If we're on a $50,000 home and the down payment is $2,500, which is the policy of the exciting family home purchase program of 95 per cent mortgage, it seems that in many cases we're almost duplicating those costs when we go through the whole process of the application fee, the appraisal fee, the survey certificate, the legal costs, and the mortgage insurance. I would just ask again, as the minister indicated the other day that he's prepared to review it and, if possible, change it in the future. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr.

Chairman, as I said the other day, I always have an open mind in this situation — in any of these situations. I'd be happy to discuss that particular point once more with the hon. Member for Lethbridge West, although I guess we basically don't agree on it. Prepayment costs are real. I'm sure our lawyers in the House can indicate to you that they are real. We've not really intended to compete with the pri­ vate sector in this area.

Our thinking has been that the operation should be relatively competitive with the pri­ vate sector, and that help for low-income people should be primarily, through the subsidy, not necessarily getting some different sort of arrangement, whether in terms of prepayment or other standard areas, than would be ob­ tained through the private sector. Again, I'd be happy to discuss the subject further. MR. GOGO: Mr. Chairman, just for clarification, if anyone in this House believes I'm predisposed to remov­ ing food and milk from the children of those in the legal profession.

Surely after five years in the Assembly it's perfectly obvious that I'm among the strongest supporters of the legal profession. I'm simply asking for a change, if it can be done administratively — and it appears to be an administrative move. I'm certainly open to persuasion the other way. If these costs can be avoided, I would ask that every effort by made in order to afford young Albertans affordable housing, which is the whole purpose of the policy. If they can be changed, I'd appreciate anything the minister could do. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr.

Chairman, I might add that I think I missed one of the first questions the hon. member asked me. It wasn't on this particular point. I wonder if he'd mind repeating it, or giving me a hint. MR. GOGO: Mr. Chairman, if I could remember, I'd re-ask the minister. [laughter] I suppose it was to com­ pliment him for doing a good job. I'd like him to remember that. MR. CHAMBERS: If I do think of the question, I'll also try to think of the answer. Agreed to: 6.3 — Subsidized Housing for Low Income Albertans $33,540,000 MR. BATIUK: Mr.

Chairman, before we leave subsi­ dized housing for low-income families, I wonder whether this may be in order; I was out of the House. It seems that the biggest concern now is senior citizens' lodges. Even though I appreciate the amount of subsidy they are given, maybe in conjunction with the renters' assistance, already it has come to some places where there are one, two, and three senior citizens' lodges in the

894 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 foundation. When they run a deficit of $20,000, $30,000, or $40,000 each, it comes out as a heavy burden on these municipalities. The minister stated earlier that the pre­ vious year only three lodges were approved. It's not that they are not needed, but municipalities are very hesitant to apply for these, because they know they are going to be a burden.

I wonder whether support in this area, or even in renters' assistance, where there is only a provision of $500 for those who reside in subsidized housing and $1,000 for those renting privately — maybe it would be good to give the full $1,000 to all, but half that $1,000 be paid directly to the housing foundations of the municipalities. That would alleviate it. I know for a fact that in my constituency and in many others, municipalities are hesitant to make application, even if there is a need for them, because they know this burden is going to fall on the local taxpayer.

Less than 10 years ago, these senior citizens lodges worked and were able to manage without any deficit whatsoever. But be­ cause of cost or inflation and the sheltered rates for senior citizens, it's becoming quite a burden. I wonder if the minister is in a position to see how he feels about that, or maybe even with the Minister of Municipal Affairs. This would be something worth looking at in the future. MR. CAMPBELL: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to bring to the minister's attention a request I've had from Manor House in Eckville for a recreation room.

They've requested as­ sistance, or possibly that a facility be put in place. As it stands now, they are using a couple of rooms. I wonder if there is availability of this particular project being pro­ gressed with? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, to answer the Mem­ ber for Vegreville first, of course the lodge deficits are of concern to some areas. Some foundations seem to be able to operate with little or no deficit, and others incur a higher deficit.

As I'm sure members are aware, we have a program to pay 50 per cent over two mills, which is quite helpful and results in a significant grant payment to the various foundations. Basically, the foundations like the way the program operates. I've met with them from time to time, and they've assured me that they generally prefer the way the program is. They did request rental rate increases, which were granted last fall. However, they indicated some concern in terms of deficits, particularly with regard to certain lodges.

Through the Department of Housing and Public Works, we have undertaken a review of the way lodges are funded. We're working with the senior citizens' homes association — the organization of the foundations. It's premature to say, but after we've had a good look at it, perhaps we can devise a better way of assisting in that area. With regard to the question of the Member for Rocky Mountain House: through the corporation, of course, we attempt to achieve the best or the most for the dollar. We apply standards and guidelines in terms of cost per unit and in terms of recreational space per volume of the unit.

In other words, given the size of unit, a certain amount would be allotted for that purpose. But I think it's desir­ able to keep these relatively comparable. I don't think it would be fair to give one unit some extra space or type of space that another one wouldn't get. So there is a need to keep them equitable and fair, and to try to achieve the most accommodation for the budget dollar. I think the Member for Lethbridge actually asked about — or maybe he was merely commenting on — the maximums: $56,000 for the existing house and $70,000 for a new unit now. That's a judgment factor.

These were raised not too long ago, from $52,000 to $56,000 for existing, and from $64,000 to $70,000 for new. At this time I think the numbers are quite adequate, judging from the number of applications we're getting from buil­ ders. Of course the idea is to achieve affordability and to allow what may be built in terms of modest yet adequate accommodation. Outside the major metropolitan areas, these prices will generally cover a single-family detached. In Edmonton and Calgary they do to some extent, but primarily they apply to patio homes, side-by-sides, or housing of that type, which is quite adequate.

I might add that the builders are enthusiastic about the program and these prices, and we have a large number of applications. MR. L. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, not too long ago in the House, the minister announced a new program for senior citizens who required housing, whereby non-profit or­ ganizations could build accommodations for senior citi­ zens under a long-term lease or by buying the land. Would that new program apply to Indian reserves, if they could meet the criteria of the long-lease arrangements? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, we haven't had any program in that area to this point in time.

I should point out, though, that the pioneer repair grants did apply. Mr. Chairman, I wouldn't want to mislead my friend from Lethbridge. The family home purchase subsidies we're mutually discussing should really be covered under Vote 7, but I was thinking about something else when he asked me that question. I guess that doesn't really matter, in that I presume the dialogue would be the same regardless. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Chairman, I have just a couple of questions for the minister under this vote. On page 110 of the Elements, Mr. Minister, I see that Metis housing has been reduced from $236,000 to $230,000.

Could the min­ ister outline what is proposed this year in that budget, and why there is a reduction? Also, there is an increase of approximately 10 per cent for rural and native housing. Could the minister outline how many houses are planned this year under the rural and native housing program? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, first of all, the Metis housing is an old program that preceded the rural and native housing program. Therefore, as those houses have in some cases been purchased over the years, the operat­ ing cost, if you like, that appears here, reduces over the years.

With regard to the number of units, the capital budgets of the two corporations are shown in the budget speech. I can't find them right now, but if there are any other questions in the meantime, I'll try to locate those numbers. MR. BATIUK: Mr. Chairman, I want to assure the minister that when I made those few remarks, in no way was I critical of the thing. But I felt that was one area that might need some attention. I think all the other programs are very well accepted throughout the constitu­ ency and the province. I can see a continuing demand for the self-contained units.

I have never seen anything as popular as those are becoming. A couple are being con­ structed in the constituency, and there are waiting lists considerably longer than they will accommodate. Because

May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 895 our elderly people are living longer now, and their health seems to be better, it seems they will be looking for such accommodation more than for lodges. I wouldn't be surprised that very shortly there will be no requirement for additional senior citizens' lodges, but for self- contained units. They're really well accepted, and a real favorite in the community. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, I have located the paper I was looking for. We have 50 rural and native units in the budget.

I might add that since the spring of '78, they're built not for rental but upon application for ownership. They're also being handled by the CHAP people through that program, which I think is working very well. We've had a stronger demand for mobile homes. So under the mobile home program we have, I believe, 250 units. In transitional housing, 125 — it ap­ plies in the larger employment centres. In the rural home assistance program, which applies in unincorporated municipalities, we have 100 units. MR. GOGO: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I could ask just two short questions.

On Saturday I attended a workshop in Lethbridge, sponsored by the physically disabled peo­ ple. They had over 100 registrants. Many areas were covered in their workshop. First of all, I would like to say to the minister how very pleased they are with the expansion of the home adapta­ tion program for the physically handicapped. As you know, Mr.

Chairman, originally it had been restricted to senior citizens: I wonder if, particularly in the urban centres of Calgary and Edmonton, consideration is being given in the home adaptation program to protective de­ vices — as opposed to ramps, patio doors, and that type of thing — for deaf mutes and others, where smoke alarms wouldn't normally be effective; if that money could be used toward wiring in with the fire departments or police organizations the system for the residences of handicapped people who can neither see nor hear? Mr.

Chairman, the other point: the capital grants to non-profit groups being expanded. I wonder if the minis­ ter could indicate whether a group such as the Canadian Legion, wanting to construct senior citizen accommoda­ tion, notwithstanding the fact they wouldn't preclude it only to their members — I understand that's a policy question. Could the minister clarify that, in his ministerial statement of April 30, those capital grants to non-profit organizations would include groups such as veterans' organizations who wish to construct senior citizen ac­ commodation either on or adjacent to their existing properties?

Because one of the criteria is that they must own the land, and can use that land as an equity contrib­ ution to the project. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Chairman, I see no reason why it wouldn't. Any non-profit organization interested in providing accommodation for seniors should feel free to apply, and I hope they do. Again, as the member pointed out, they may use their land for equity. Then the one- third grant is available and the funding is available through the Alberta Home Mortgage Corporation, with the write-down being provided.

I'm happy to give consid­ eration to the member's advice with regard to the handicapped. Agreed to: 6.4 — Land Assembly and Development $3,259,000 Total Vote 6 — Housing for Albertans $44,113,000 7.1 — Program Support $5,094,000 7.2 — Mortgage Lending ($8,825,000) 7.3 — Subsidies $16,235,000 Total Vote 7 — Mortgage Assistance $12,504,000 Department Total $397,984,000 MR.

CHAIRMAN: There are also some supplementary estimates. head: Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure (A), 1980-81 Agreed to: 5.2.5 — Housing Assistance $340,000 5.3.13 — Financial Assistance for Housing $15,000,000 5.3.14 — Home Conversion Grants $100,000 Total Vote 5(a) — Policy Development and Financial Assistance for Housing $15,440,000 6.3.8 — Subsidized Housing for Low Income Albertans $9,000,000 Total Vote 6(a) — Housing for Albertans $9,000,000 7.3.1 — Subsidies $2,250,000 Total Vote 7(a) — Mortgage Assistance $2,250,000 MR. CHAMBERS: Mr.

Chairman, before concluding, I have responses to a couple of questions asked previously by the hon. Leader of the Opposition. The cost of the Natural Resources Building — and again, we're estimat­ ing final cost — is $8,955,000; the Administration Build­ ing, $4,985,000. It's estimated that the corporate tax people will use about one-half of the building, and other Treasury staff the balance of the building. The telecommunications item, the $100,000. I under­ stand that at this time the highway patrol, ambulances, forestry, Solicitor General, and so forth, all have separate systems.

The money is to investigate the possibility of achieving economies and some sort of co-ordination. Mr. Chairman, I move that the votes be reported. [Motion carried] Department of the Solicitor General MR. CHAIRMAN: Did the hon. minister wish to make some comments? MR. HARLE: Mr. Chairman, in talking about the esti­ mates of the Solicitor General, first of all I would like to refer to some of the areas I've had some concern about. It relates to the work in our correctional system that I think is very much unappreciated by the public at large.

The day to day concerns correctional staff have to face are something which I don't think the general public appreciates. The correctional staff must, of necessity, care for and look after people who have been in conflict with the law. Particularly in the period when they are on remand, I think they are quite reasonably under a fair amount of

896 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 uncertainty. They do not know what is going to happen to them. Many of them are not fully familiar with the court processes; some of them have come into conflict with the law for the first time. The result is that that uncertainty creates a problem for them as inmates in the remand facilities, and to the correctional staff who have the duty of looking after them.

While it is less true of inmates who have been sentenced and are in our other correctional facilities, nevertheless it is the case that they are looking after people who have been in conflict with the law and sometimes it is very difficult to predict with any degree of certainty what those inmates will do. As a result, the mere possibility of violent attacks by inmates means that the correctional staff must; I think, be reas­ sured about their own worth to the system as well as their own safety.

While I can say to them that I believe the public understands and appreciates the work that must of neces­ sity be done by correctional officers, as Solicitor General, responsible for the correction system, I want to say in addition that the government also appreciates the work they do and, when the occasion arose, has raised the necessary funds to make sure our correctional officers are fully protected, and are fully supported by the staff needed to look after the inmates they must take.

Also we will forever be updating the facilities and programs that relate not only to correctional officers but also to the inmates. We will try to achieve some rehabilitation, if you like, some way in which we can release people to society. After all, almost all the inmates that come into our system go back into society at the end of their terms. A number of things have been done of late, and some plans are developing. I would like to advise hon. mem­ bers of some of the things that are going to be taking place during the course of this year.

Hon. members will be aware that a study of all provincial correctional facili­ ties was completed recently. This review was commis­ sioned by Alberta Housing and Public Works on behalf of that department and the Solicitor General's Depart­ ment. It was made by Moyer Associates Inc. of Chicago. This firm enjoys a reputation of being knowledgeable in the specialized field, particularly the architectural and the functional planning fields of correctional facilities. Their final report was delivered to me on February 1, 1980, and distributed to all members and filed in the Legislature Library.

Two of the suggestions in that report were that the Fort Saskatchewan Correctional Institution should be replaced and that the Calgary Remand Centre was per­ haps not adequate for the purposes intended. Together with senior officials in the department, I happen to agree with both those recommendations. Indeed, they come as no surprise, certainly to anyone who has been in those facilities and seen their operation. The Moyer study con­ firms my own feeling about those two institutions from the visits I've made.

The reason for the Fort Saskatchewan Correctional Institution being replaced is simply that it's perhaps now somewhat obsolete, certainly in some of the facilities that exist there. It's a collection of rather aging buildings, perhaps not very efficient for the program plans we need today compared to when it was built in about 1912. And it's becoming more and more expensive to operate. The need to replace the Calgary Remand Centre after only a few years of operation can.

I think, be attributed mostly to the growing demand on that facility and on the Calgary law courts with which the Remand Centre pres­ ently shares a structure. Both the Remand Centre and the courts need more space to handle their growing work loads. As there is no room on the present site to expand either or both, I think there is a necessity to seek a new location for a remand centre. I want to take this opportunity today to advise hon. members that I am recommending that planning com­ mence immediately with a view to replacing both those institutions with new facilities.

By starting now, I hope we should be able to have both new institutions open and operating in 1984, or at least 1985. With respect to the Fort Saskatchewan correctional facility, the Department of Housing and Public Works has been able to make available a site, purchased some time ago, north of the city and immediately west of the Edmonton Institution, which is the federal maximum security penitentiary. Once that new facility is open, the present Fort Saskatchewan site would become available. Because of its location, almost in the town of Fort Saskatchewan, I'm sure it will be of interest to that community.

No decision has been made about the ulti­ mate use of the old site. In any event it is somewhere down the road before that could happen. No decision has been made about the location of the new remand centre for Calgary. Another site in a central downtown location close to the law courts and police station is perhaps necessary. Alberta Housing and Public Works will now commence looking for a site, and the task will admittedly be a difficult one because of the congestion in the downtown area.

I can say, however, that no final decision has been made about the size or inmate capacity of these two new institutions, hence it is not possible at this time to predict how much they might cost. However, both will probably have a capacity somewhere in the range of 350 to 500 inmates, and hence will be relatively large institutions. The building of those two new institutions is part of the ongoing program to provide and maintain good correc­ tional facilities throughout the province. This year there are a number of construction projects at nine other correctional facilities.

I would like to summarize the proposals for the correctional facilities which are covered either in the budget of the Department of Housing and Public works or, of course, in the program side within the Department of the Solicitor General. The new St. Paul Correctional Centre was just opened a week or so ago. That structure is really the rehabilita­ tion of an existing building, consisting of the St. Paul seminary and bishop's residence. The rehabilitation has been done, and further work will be done to complete some workshops and gymnasiums during the course of this year.

The new Lethbridge correctional institution is started. It will result in an expenditure of about $8.6 million. When it's finally completed in 1982, the total cost will be in the neighborhood of $20.6 million. Some renovations will be needed at the existing facilities, so that we can carry on there until the new ones are ready for occupancy. In Calgary, work is progressing on the design of a new detoxification centre at the site of the old Red Cross building at 2nd Street and 5th Avenue Southeast.

An expenditure of $670,000 is proposed this year, and there will be renovations which will probably total $850,000 before the work is completed. Construction is scheduled to begin this summer on the southern Alberta community correctional centre, a new minimum security facility, which is to be located on the Spy Hill property west of

May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 897 Calgary. During the estimates of the Department of Housing and Public Works, hon. members of the Legisla­ ture were asked to approve funds for this work this year. I hope the facility will be completed by 1982. Renova­ tions to the dormitories and other areas are under way at the main Calgary Correctional Institution at Spy Hill. Again, these funds were included in the estimates of the Department of Housing and Public Works. There will be some modifications to the Edmonton Remand Centre.

Work will be done to complete the unfinished basement area, and the balance will be used for improvements within the Edmonton Remand Centre. Renovations are under way to the kitchen and other areas of the Belmont Correctional Centre in northeast Edmon­ ton. Some $280,000 in projects was included in the Department of Housing and Public Works. Some work will have to be done to the Fort Saskatch­ ewan Correctional Institution to keep it functioning until the new facility is built and we can move into it.

Original­ ly, more extensive alterations were planned, but the proj­ ect has been scaled down in anticipation of the move to new facilities, as I indicated earlier. The Calgary Remand Centre will also need some work done on it. In the current year, there is $150,000 to complete work now under way, which, again, I believe was included in the Department of Housing and Public Works.

The present funding as far as the two new facilities I've just mentioned are concerned, is the provision of $100,000 to permit planning to begin for the new medium security correctional institution north of Edmonton, to replace the Fort Saskatchewan correctional facility. Mr. Chairman, with regard to the general funding of the department, and particularly the comments made in the Auditor General's report, the figures included in the annual report of the department are exactly the same as the figures that appear in the Public Accounts for 1978- 79.

The annual report indicated that these figures were subject to checking and audit by the Auditor General. They had been discovered, and it is certainly the view of the department, and of me as Solicitor General, that these charges to improper accounts should not have occurred and should be corrected. That was done as soon as the matter was drawn to the attention of officials in the department by the Auditor General, and that is why the figures were able to be corrected, and appear as corrected figures in the annual report of the department as well as in the Public Accounts.

A special warrant of $138,870 was obtained in Decem­ ber 1979, to provide for the extra funds and the shortage that occurred in Vote 1. The balance of the shortage, as appears in the Public Accounts, will be accounted for in expenditures during the year 1979-80. In other words, from the department's point of view it was felt we would not need all the overexpenditure that appears in the Public Accounts for that vote. Mr. Chairman, I've covered most of the items that I think should be drawn to the attention of hon. members, and I would be happy to respond to their questions and comments. MR. PURDY: Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. I have just a couple of concerns to address to the minister. One is in relation to a question I asked in the House in early April, regarding motor vehicle registration and the procedure the minister's office has now incorporated, where they started a mammoth mail-in campaign. The minister an­ swered that about 220,000 of 660,000 people who have vehicles registered responded through the mail.

Some di­ rectives were sent out that if the tabs weren't received in the mail, they should go in and receive them through a licensing agent, who in turn would run them through the computer to see if the person actually did acquire the plates and if they were lost in the mail. I got some clarifi­ cation on that system. Because of the federal system we have, with the mail as it is, and the general infringement, as far as I'm con­ cerned, on the private industry in this province, which was doing an excellent job, my view is that the mail-in program was a wrong move.

We should allow the people in private industry who were doing this, to continue doing it on the mammoth scale they were. In February this year, when the advertisement came out that the- mail-in program was on, the people in private enterprise — insurance offices and so on — didn't know if they should lay on more staff for that three- month period. I haven't had an opportunity to check back with some of the licensing agencies in rural Alberta to see if there was a real influx of people in the last couple of days to pick up motor vehicle registrations, but I suspect there was.

The other real concern is regarding the insurance end of it. In this Legislature in 1972, '73, and '74, I was very vocal that people had to prove that they in fact had motor vehicle liability insurance when they picked up their validation tag or licence plates. With the new send- in procedure, the minister says the person is signing a statutory declaration. But I think it worked a lot better when that individual came in and had to prove financial responsibility was in place by actually showing the card. I would like to see that taken a step further, Mr.

Chairman, and suggest to the minister and the depart­ ment, that we seriously consider some type of regulation where, if a person does not renew his insurance, or cancels it, the motor vehicles branch is notified, and a check could be done on that individual. Every day on the highways in the province, we're picking up a number of people who are driving with no motor vehicle insurance. But there are a lot of other individuals out there who aren't getting caught, and that's my concern. The $400 fine we have in the legislation right now is very nominal. I think the amendments before us will certainly enhance that.

But I would ask the minister to give serious consid­ eration to reverting to the old procedure, where what we commonly call the "pink card" has to be taken in and shown. The second concern I have is regarding policing in the province. My figures may be out a bit, but I understand that last year in the federal/provincial contract we asked for 174 RCMP members to take over some of the rural areas we have in the fast-growing part of the province of Alberta. I think we only got 24. I stand to be corrected, but those are the figures I read someplace.

I would like to ask the minister what he has in place to eliminate this problem, because the province is growing by 40,000 to 50,000 people a year, and we're not keeping up with the usual ratio of 1:800. Therefore, I'm asking the minister what he sees for the future, and for the 1981 contract that will be signed with the federal government for policing in the province of Alberta. My final question, Mr. Chairman: does the minister foresee a provincial police force? MR; R. CLARK: Mr.

Chairman, far be it from me to direct how the committee wants to go about its work, but it's my understanding that the Member for Stony Plain is about to take the Chair. If the minister wants to respond

898 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 to those questions first, and give the member a chance to engage in debate before he takes the Chair, he might be in a better mood when he gets to the Chair. MR. HARLE: Mr. Chairman, we will be doing an as­ sessment of the mail-in again this year. It was started last year as a pilot project, appeared to be successful, and was used again this year for renewal of the tags. I checked at the end of April; on April 29, as a matter of fact.

We had expected that some 1.4 million tags would be renewed out of the total of almost 1.8 million we would eventually expect, the difference being accounted for by people with recreation vehicles and other vehicles, and new vehicles. As of April 29, 1.1 million tags had been issued, or about 75 per cent of the 1.4 million expected. Some 214,566 had been renewed by mail by that time, and the outstanding 350,000 expected before April 30 were being renewed at the rate of about 60,000 to 80,000 a day. Therefore, we expected that we would be up to date by Saturday of that week.

In fact, there was very little in the way of line-ups this year. There was some lining up on the last day or two. I think that part of the mail-in process was in fact a success. Advertising helped to get people to go in and renew their tags before the registration lapsed. However, we will be looking at it and reviewing it to see whether any improvements can be made. With regard to the pink card situation, this is some­ thing which needs the co-operation, really, of the insur­ ance industry and the department. A number of things have been tried.

Certainly the application form for the tags was changed this year to get an insurance certifica­ tion, which has to be signed, providing the name of the insurance company, the agency, the policy number, and the expiry date. That's no different information than is already on the pink card. If an individual filled out that application when he took in the application for renewal tags, then I could see no point in actually having to produce the pink card. Many times that was out in the vehicle, so that would completely slow down the process at the desks.

If someone were going to commit fraud, then those pink cards themselves are not fraudproof. They're just printed; they can be picked up anywhere. We do say on the certification that if upon audit it is found the vehicle is not insured, the registered owner may be liable to prosecution. It would be our intention to develop a capacity to carry out that audit, and to make checks of individual applications to see whether the insurance is as set out in the declaration. I think that really provides more information and a better policing system than the old one.

Under the old system, if they produced what looked like a pink card, the clerk on the desk would say: thank you, that's fine, that's the end of it, and wouldn't mark down any of the details. From a policing point of view, this way we have the information on file and audits can be checked. The vast majority of our citizens are in fact law abiding, and do in fact have the insurance it is their obligation to carry. I submit that putting every citizen through more hoops than providing that information is really an imposition on the majority of law-abiding citi­ zens.

However, because we will build a capacity to audit these applications, we should be able to do a better policing job in following up on the insurance requirements. MR. PURDY: Mr. Chairman, there was the second ques­ tion I asked of the minister, regarding policing.

But before the minister comes back to that, the only comment I would make regarding motor vehicle registration is that next time the department is going to do some advertising in the local paper, is there some way they can make it the same size as private industry, and buy us a quarter page instead of the half page the minister's office buys to advertise mailing your registration? MR. HARLE: Mr. Chairman, with regard to the RCMP situation, there will of course be meetings over the course of the summer with the new federal Solicitor General. I did have the opportunity to contact the federal Solicitor General, Mr.

Lawrence, when the previous government was in charge of things. Certainly, there was a great deal of sympathy at that time. I don't know what view the new federal Solicitor General will take in this area. There are and will be negotiations for the new contract, and I'm sure part of the discussions at that time will be this problem of supplying additional men. As far as the provincial police force is concerned, I would prefer to say that I think the government should keep its options open.

I detect that the public generally is very supportive of the work done by the RCMP, and it's certainly my intention to make every effort to persuade the federal Solicitor General of the needs we have in Alberta, because of the growth that has occurred in this province and the need to keep the police to population ratio within some range so that we can provide adequate police services to our citizens. [Mr. Purdy in the Chair] MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, through you to the minister. In the course of the introductory comments, I noticed no reference at all to the area of young offenders.

In the discussions which took place concerning the esti­ mates of the Minister of Social Services and Community Health, some reference was made to develop some facility which would take young offenders out of some of the institutions run by that department and place [them] in facilities other than places like Fort Saskatchewan — Fort Saskatchewan old, or new, wherever it's going to be — or Spy Hill, Lethbridge, or Peace River. I am aware that several years ago, about 1972, the government chose really to mix young offenders and older offenders in the same institutions.

We've been be­ fore Public Accounts in the past and heard this talk about classification and how they're kept separate. But all one has to do is talk to some of the parents, from my riding and from other ridings, where young offenders end up in Fort Saskatchewan or Spy Hill especially. Any semblance of total separation of young offenders and older, more hardcore offenders or repeaters, if I might use that rather unglorified term, is virtually impossible for the staff. The realistic experience I've had, talking to people who have had young offenders in there, is that that doesn't happen.

I'm very disappointed that in the outline for the capital appropriations, not only for this year but for the period of time that lies ahead — the minister mentioned Fort Saskatchewan and a new re­ mand centre in Calgary, and I'll get to that in a moment — there was no reference or indication of a commitment to a centre for young offenders in the province. Mr. Minister, we have a situation today where we can't get enough law enforcement officers from the federal government. I'm not laying that at the minister's doors­ tep; I'll have more to say about the minister's doorstep in a few moments.

When one looks at the rate of recidiv . . .

May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 899 the rate of people coming back to our institutions for a second and third time, the records indicate that 63.2 per cent of individuals who get into the provincial institutions come back for a second time, and that 89 per cent of people who end up in our provincial institutions have been arrested before. Mr.

Minister, it seems to me that the place we have to start is in prevention, which I didn't hear word on in the course of the minister's remarks; and secondly, in this area of trying to do something to separate young offend­ ers from older offenders, the repeaters who end up going back time and time again. Mr. Chairman, I heard abso­ lutely nothing in the minister's remarks to deal with that. I suppose one of the areas where the minister deserves credit is where the minister is attempting to initiate a number of programs such as the fine-option program.

I certainly agree with the movement towards community- based corrections. These are good initiatives, Mr. Minis­ ter, but they certainly have to be expanded upon and built upon. I was interested to note the new federally funded program for juveniles in Lethbridge. This pro­ gram, being lodged in Lethbridge, I believe in co­ operation with the John Howard Society and the federal government, could very well be a program the province should be looking at as far as some future initiatives in this area. That program was announced by the federal Solicitor General in Red Deer, I believe, not many weeks ago.

I'm not sure whether it's the minister's department or some other department, but somehow there has to be far more co-ordination of programs between the minister's department, Social Services and Community Health, and the public education system. Mr. Minister, I don't plan to stand here this afternoon for an extended period of time and remake the case that's been made to the minister's department at least three times by a number of communi­ ties, some in my riding and some adjacent to my riding, with regard to the role of police commissions.

I need not mention the reaction the minister got at the meeting of the provincial police commissions at Calgary, which was anything other than flattering, when the people who give pretty generously of their time as police commissions across the province, attempted to get some answers from the minister and his officials. We go back to this question of the buck passing all over the place. Mr. Minister, I recognize that this is not an easy department. But it's becoming very frustrating for police commissions, be they at Olds or a number of other areas across the province.

I hope those in the minister's department who think that only the Olds police commis­ sion is upset were at the meeting of the police commis­ sions in Calgary, when the minister and his officials met with a variety of police commissions across the province, because they will find out it wasn't just the group that happened to emanate from Olds. I'd like to make one other comment in this area, Mr. Minister. I said I'm not sure it's the responsibility of the Solicitor General's Department, or Social Services and Community Health, or Education, or where it is.

Some­ how, someplace in this province there has to be an emphasis in the area of prevention. Mr. Minister, through the Chairman, the Solicitor General's Department ends up very often, almost all the time, dealing with casualties. But we're not very successful in dealing with those casual­ ties, once they reach the minister's department. I don't lay the blame at the minister's door, but someplace, working with communities, be it police commissions, the educa­ tion system, volunteers in the community . . .

With a province growing by 50,000 or 60,000 people a year, this year we're going to fall something like 150 RCMP offi­ cers short of what we say we need in this province. I don't see us making any kind of a co-ordinated effort from the standpoint of prevention. I know all the responsibility doesn't rest with this Assembly. Some of the responsibility rests locally; some with volunteer organizations. But it seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that someplace there's a need for initiative to try to pull that together.

If we don't, we can come back five years from now, and the rate of people going back to institutions will be somewhat higher, our success will be somewhat less, we can wring our hands more, and we may be further behind as far as the allocation of RCMP officers is concerned. It reminds me somewhat of Nero fiddling while Rome burns. Now I'm not suggesting that Alberta is at the burning stage, from the standpoint of the Solicitor General's department; although it certainly is forest fire- wise. But someplace, Mr. Minister, there is a need for us to co-ordinate our activities.

I find that a large number of people in local government have real concerns here, but aren't able to get those concerns mobilized as a result of red tape, going to the wrong department, or not getting the right kind of co-ordination. Mr. Minister, it's the Department of the Solicitor General that ends up with the casualties. Strange as it may seem, it may well be that the initia­ tive for this co-ordination and a province-wide effort in this area of prevention will have to start from the unlikely source of the Solicitor General.

The present Solicitor General has the reputation of being a rather quiet indi­ vidual and the public feels — I better not say "the public" — certainly I feel that on a lot of occasions, officials of the department run the department rather than the minis­ ter. Here would be what I think is a great opportunity for the minister to give some leadership across the province in this whole field of prevention. Mr. Minister, I would like to dwell upon two other areas for a few moments. One is this question of the availability of RCMP. I think I have the same point of view as the minister.

It would be desirable in this prov­ ince if we could continue to have the bulk of our police work outside Calgary and Edmonton done by the RCMP: But for the last several years, we've been attempt­ ing to get the RCMP to meet Alberta's demands. Mr. Minister, I'd be very interested in knowing what Alberta's request was this year. Was it the 174 that has already been referred to? Are we going to get 24 officers? Mr. Minister, last year we had somewhat the same kind of experience.

Looking at the federal Conservative budget, I recall there was precious little money for the kind of expansion of the RCMP force that was needed. I don't expect the present government in Ottawa, and with its orientation, to increase the size of the RCMP force to meet Alberta's demands. I know other provinces have similar demands. Mr. Minister, reference was made by you earlier this afternoon that Alberta should keep its options open. I think there are three things Alberta should do in this area. First of all, we should make use of the provincial fellows who do that work.

I refer to them as the Solicitor General's men in blue, who have those blue cars and often are better equipped than the RCMP. Isn't it possi­ ble for those people to take on much of the work done on highways like No. 2, No. 16, and the Trans-Canada Highway, from the standpoint of speeding and that kind of work? I'm not suggesting they could replace the

900 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 RCMP completely. I am suggesting that they could take much of the pressure off the RCMP, so that RCMP personnel could be deployed more in keeping with their training; it's certainly a great deal more than holding that radar gun and writing out a ticket. I think the provincial people could take on much of that responsibility. Secondly, Mr. Minister, it seems to me that before long the province has to decide whether we're going to get the number of people we should, as far as RCMP members are concerned, or whether we're going to have to paddle our own canoe.

I would be reluctant to see us have to paddle our own canoe, because some people would asso­ ciate that with Alberta becoming very, very, independent; some would put a separatist point of view on it. That's a danger. Mr. Minister, the other side of the coin is that if we don't get the number of people we need from the RCMP before long, from the standpoint of law enforce­ ment, with the kind of growth we're seeing in this prov­ ince, the increase we see in crime statistics wherever one looks, then we're just asking for a great deal more serious problems in the province. Mr.

Minister, loath as I am to suggest we should consider our own provincial police force, I would say that within one or two years at the very most, unless we can get some satisfaction from the federal government that we're going to be able to get the number of RCMP people to meet our needs in this province, then Alberta is going to have to strike out on its own. That may very well be something the other western provinces may want to co-operate with in some regard. To my recollection, one of the great problems is the cost of training. That cost is very, very great.

If my memory is accurate, I recall in the early '60s, about '62 or '63, the province made the decision to estab­ lish its own police force. Following that, a commitment was garnered from the federal government that they would supply Alberta with the number of RCMP people that were needed. That was a rather welcome decision by the federal government. It seems to me we're at about that stage once again. We've got to get a commitment from Ottawa that we can have the number of men and women we need, or we're going to have to go the route of our own provincial force.

Unless my position be misunderstood: I would far pref­ er we continue to use the services of the RCMP. But if Albertans are going to be forced to choose between being tremendously understaffed in the next number of years and retain RCMP services or being able to go a different route ourselves with a provincial force, then I think we would have to opt in favor of going the route of a provincial force if we can't get those assurances from Ottawa, as regrettable as that would be. Mr. Chairman, the third and last area I want to comment on is what's commonly referred to as the Moyer report.

I, for one, thought it was a report from an independent review committee headed by this firm that, we were told by both the Minister of Housing and Public Works and the Solicitor General, was the most outstand­ ing group in North America; they were obviously the ones we had to go to. There was no one good enough in Canada; we went to Chicago to get these people. Then the report changed its direction considerably. At least when I look at the draft I have, compared to the final version, there are some rather sizable changes.

The report ended up not being the Moyer report — I can see why the consultants didn't want to put their name on the front — it ended up being the Alberta Corrections Review. It was commissioned by the department and subsequently be­ came its property. In my judgment, participation of the department in making recommendations raises serious doubts about the value of the report. The possibility that the report was — I use the term — rather extensively laundered is very clearly there I think. Mr. Minister, earlier in my remarks I made the jesting comment about the minister being a very soft-spoken individual.

If I were a bureaucrat in the department, wanting to continue to have my hand on the rudder, I would work out this kind of deal with a consulting firm: bring in a firm from an awfully long distance, convince that firm it should make its recommendations and then the department launder and work them around, and so on, under the guise of, well, if we make recommendations like that, they're very likely to be implemented. That's just the way I'd go about it if I were a bureaucrat who wanted to keep a very, very firm hand on what's going on. Mr.

Minister, I suggest to you, with the greatest re­ spect, that unbeknownst to you this is really what's happened in this particular situation. When I look at the earlier draft and the final one, certainly sections were added almost totally, as a result of work done in the minister's department, that weren't in the early draft at all. Mr. Minister, I can hear the arguments which will be coming back: if we don't get a report that departmental people have worked on, the possibility of getting it approved and accepted isn't very great. Frankly, the report is to the minister.

If some very harsh things needed to be said and some very definite new directions set out, then this Moyer group, frankly, was the group I thought was going to come in and give us a first-rate, independent look at what was going on in the department. Mr. Minister, I think we should likely get some group like a legislative committee. Members will recall the Hon. Mark MacGuigan, now the Secretary of State for Ex­ ternal Affairs for Canada, who headed a committee of members from both sides of the House of Commons. They did a very extensive but very quick report on the state of the correctional system across Canada.

There was support on both sides of the House, and my understand­ ing is that a large number of the substantive recommen­ dations have been implemented. Perhaps if we were to pull together a legislative committee of the Mark Mac­ Guigan style and supplement it somewhat with people from the John Howard Society and one or two others I can think of, we'd have a report that could be done in six months, wouldn't cost us $400,000 and, frankly, wouldn't be laundered by departmental people. There's no question that there's a great deal of concern, and that concern should be addressed. I'll have more comments later on, Mr.

Chairman, but I would very much appreciate the minister responding to those four areas. MR. LITTLE: Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. I have one or two questions and a number of comments to address to the minister. The questions: I would like to know the cost per inmate-year in all the Alberta correc­ tional institutions. Also, what is the cost per unit in the proposed new construction areas; that is, how much to house one inmate? I recall the last addition to the Leth- bridge Correctional. Institution.

If memory serves me cor­ rectly, it was something in the area of $70,000 per inmate, which seemed a little bit out of line to me. In view of the fact that the minister has commissioned a study on corrections in Alberta, if I make some rather unacademic comments I hope the minister will accept

May 12, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 901 them in the light they are offered; that is, to be helpful rather than critical. I'm not entirely persuaded that we need any more medium security institutions. My own experience was with Spy Hill, now known as the Calgary Correctional Institution. During the years I served, there were approximately 450 inmates in that institution at any given time. One-half to two-thirds of them were rubby- dubs or derelicts; that is, middle-aged or older men who were in there for alcohol-related offences, and who wouldn't leave if you left the door open.

Usually in our Alberta institutions, the total number of custodians either equals or exceeds the total number of inmates. I recom­ mend that in view of this type of inmate, we don't need the medium security institution. Just to relate a little anecdote about one of them. I recall that derelicts used to get a 10-day sentence for an alcohol offence under the Alberta liquor Act. Out of the 10 days they served eight days; that is, they got two days off for good behavior. One of these derelicts made 31 trips to Spy Hill jail in one year. Thirty-one 10-day trips. He filled in the year.

Think of the cost of transporting the man back and forth to a medium security institution. On his final term of the year, his 31st, his eighth day was up on Christmas Eve. The warden called him in and said, "Have you got anyplace to go for Christmas, John?" He said, "No, I haven't, warden". "Well", he said, "in that case I think we'll take away your two days good time and keep you in over Christmas and the day after". The point I'm making . . . Please don't gather from these remarks, Mr. Minister, that I'm going soft on offenders. I wouldn't want that reputation to get around.

Indeed, I think we need at least one institution in this province, a maximum security provincial institution, for some of the hard rocks. But dealing strictly with the derelicts, we don't need them in a medium security insti­ tution. I visited one type of facility in the state of Califor­ nia, that I was very impressed with. They call them honor farms — no bars, no walls, no fences, a minimum of guards. These people produce the fruits and vegetables for the California jail system, also serving a useful pur­ pose.

If they did elope — we can't use the word "escape" for an institution of that nature — the penalty was to be sent to a normal medium security jail. Now I realize that in the last several years you have instituted a number of labor and forestry camps, and I certainly congratulate you for this, Mr. Minister. But I suggest that if these types of programs were extended, we could reduce the numbers in the medium security institutions and therefore the costs. I certainly agree with the remarks on segregation by the Leader of the Opposition.

Indeed the middle-aged or older derelicts don't want young offenders around them. It isn't a case of the young offender not wanting them there. The old offender doesn't want them around be­ cause they cause trouble and give problems in the system. The repeaters — I could point out to the Leader of the Opposition that the pronunciation of the word is recidi­ vism, not people who have been convicted time and time again. The recidivism rate is very extensive in this prov­ ince, and we're all aware of it. But that is all the less reason for increasing the number of medium security in­ stitutions.

Segregation is extremely important, and this could be done by institution rather than by separating portions of the institution. But the main point I am making, Mr. Minister, is that I think we should give some earnest consideration before we proceed with large num­ bers of additional cells or custodial areas for persons who do not require this type of custody. MR. ZAOZIRNY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I feel at something of a disadvantage in following the hon. Member for McCall, who has had so many years of experience with our jails [laughter] as a former peace officer.

None the less, I would like to address a few remarks and questions to the hon. Solicitor General, that flow in large measure from questions and answers during question period last Friday, with regard to the matter of law enforcement grants. As was raised in a cursory way at that time, within the strict confines of question period, the fact is that in 1975 the then Solicitor General, Mr. Farran, put forward position paper No. 19 to the Alberta Legislature, at which time he announced this new form of unconditional grants, designed specifically to meet esca­ lating costs for improved law enforcement. [Mr.

Appleby in the Chair] The formula to be applied took into account the ra­ vages of inflation plus the significant growth being ex­ perienced by the entire province and certainly our metro­ politan centres, Calgary being one of those. In light of the fact that the policy put forward by the then Solicitor General really doesn't seem to have been applied — the result of course has been an increase in the combination of growth and inflation in Calgary, for example, of some 50 per cent from 1977 to 1979,

whereas the grant has only increased by only some 20 per cent, a significant shortfall for that city in particular — I'd really appreciate it if the Solicitor General could enlighten the House as to the reasons this policy was never followed. To this member's knowledge, and perhaps the Solicitor General can advise otherwise, there was never a change of policy as such. It just seemed to have gotten lost somewhere. We went ahead with increases that averaged something like 6 per cent,

whereas during that intervening period the cost of putting a police officer on the beat, if you will, rose by something like 15 per cent each year. I think this is a particularly large concern. In the metropolitan centres — and again, I can speak more specifically about Calgary — I think there is a dramatical­ ly increasing concern about public safety and law en­ forcement.

As a private citizen, I've certainly noticed in my travels much more public comment about the state of public safety: concern about more and better security systems in the home, and a general unease about whether Calgary, for one, is a safe city to reside in anymore. It has to be recognized that the incidence of crime is going to increase as the population burgeons, so it's cer­ tainly not the fault of the Solicitor General that we're experiencing those kinds of problems.

But when you have an increase of some 62 per cent in traffic offences in the last year, and when the increase in major crime from '77 to '78 is over 7 per cent, certainly we have to be address­ ing ourselves to this very major concern. Assuredly, if one of the most crucial functions of government isn't public safety and law enforcement, what is a crucial concern? So I'd appreciate the minister expanding on the reasons that gave rise to that rather reduced grant. The second area, which is related, has to do with the action the minister proposes to take.

I appreciated his response in the House last Friday, where he indicated he was going to be addressing this matter during the summer months. I was somewhat ill-at-ease with the requirement to stand by, if you will, until representation is received — presumably a written one from the city of Edmonton — not because I don't feel the city of Edmonton should be heard; of course, they should. But the fact is that the

902 ALBERTA HANSARD May 12, 1980 submission of the city of Calgary was presented in early January this year. We're now in May, five months down the road, and apparently the city of Edmonton has not yet seen fit to respond. In the view of this member, they should be given notice that they ha