Alberta Hansard — 17 April 1984, Afternoon sitting (14:30) (Legislature 20, Session 2)

19840417

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

April 17, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Tuesday, April 17, 1984 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: PRESENTING PETITIONS MR. HIEBERT: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition conducted on a limited province-wide basis and signed by 5,367 Albertans, comprised of 36 percent Edmontonians, 23 percent Calgarians, and 41 percent from other centres, in support of resolving the AGT/Edmonton Telephones dispute and restoring the telephone services and operations that existed prior to the current dispute. MR.

SPEAKER: May I ask whether the petition was submitted to the table staff beforehand and whether it's been signed by the hon. member? Perhaps we could deal with it on another occasion, but those are matters . . . MR. HIEBERT: It's my understanding that it was brought to the attention of the Clerk. I stand to be corrected on that matter. head: READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS MR. STILES: Mr. Speaker, I move that the petition for a private Bill presented to the Assembly on April 16, 1984, be now read and received. MR. SPEAKER: Does the Assembly wish to deal with the motion now? HON.

MEMBERS: Agreed. [Motion carried] head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 211 Alberta Economic Council Act MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce a Bill, being the Alberta Economic Council Act. The purpose of Bill 211 would be to establish an Alberta economic council composed of representative Albertans, which would have as its mandate the undertaking of an economic inventory of Alberta prospects. [Leave granted; Bill 211 read a first time] head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. KOZIAK: Last evening, during the course of study of the estimates of Executive Council, the hon.

Premier made ref erence to a letter which had been written to me by Metis Local No. 301, from Little Buffalo, Alberta, and indicated at that time that it was a letter which, by its nature, should be filed for the benefit of all members of the Assembly. Subsequent to those comments, and recognizing that a document of this nature should be filed during the course of a sitting of the Assembly. I obtained approval from the authors to file the document on their behalf and to indicate that there are two sides to the story in that particular area of the province. Mr.

Speaker, because of the significance of the matter, I've made copies so that all hon. members of the Legislature can be apprised of the circumstances at Little Buffalo. MR. M. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to file the annual report of Alberta Transportation for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1983. MR. KROEGER: Mr. Speaker, the annual report of the Alberta Water Resources Commission. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure to introduce to you, and through you to members of this Legislative Assembly, two people from the community of Little Buffalo.

Glen and Madeleine L'Hirondelle. This community was formerly known as L'Hirondelle, some years ago. Glen is the grandson of one of the original settlers in the Little Buffalo area. His grandfather was affectionately known as Josie, or Joe, and he settled in that area back in the 1900s. Josie, along with two other Metis members, Dan Cala- haisen and Moisie Sawan, were three of the original Metis settlers to move into that area back in the early 1900s, as I said earlier. Glen and six of his seven brothers and one of his two sisters still live and work in and around the Little Buffalo area.

Glen's father, Fleuri, passed away last May. He was one of the outstanding leaders of that community for many, many years. I now ask Glen and Madeleine L'Hirondelle to rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. MR. SZWENDER: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure today to introduce to you and to all members of the Assembly 75 bubbly and lovable grade 5 students from Delwood ele mentary school, situated in the heart of the Edmonton Belmont constituency. They are guided by three fine teachers, who tell me they have excellent morale at their school: Mr. Tymofichuk.

Miss Dobrolige, and the incomparable Madam Szwender, related by marriage to the MLA of said constituency. They are seated in the members gallery. Would they please rise and receive the customary reception of the Assembly? MR. COOK: Mr. Speaker, it's my great pleasure to introduce to you, and through you to members of the Assembly, 25 students from the grade 6 class at Mee-Yah-Noh school in the Edmonton Glengarry constituency. I believe they are in the public gallery, and I would like them now to rise and receive the very warm welcome of the Assembly. MR. MARTIN: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to introduce to you and to members of the Assembly some 25 members of the career development program at the Cromdale campus of Grant MacEwan. Accompanied by their group leader, Don Whalen, they're situated in the public gallery. I ask them to stand and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker and members of the Assembly, Miss Antonella Ciancibello and Mr. Hugh Read have brought 40 students who are engaged in the English as a Second Lan guage class at Bonnie Doon high school.

ALBERTA HANSARD April 17, 1984 If I may be permitted some levity, Mr. Speaker, it recalls to me the time I came to Canada 32 years ago, not speaking a word of English, and was asked to fly by DC-3 aircraft to Yellowknife to work in the gold mines. Since a number of passengers on that plane were ill, the stewardess walked up to me and asked me something which I thought was whether I was ill as well. I shook my head. Everybody else on that aircraft got breakfast, and I didn't. [laughter] Also, Mr.

Speaker, you can imagine my thrill — one of the greatest thrills of my lifetime — when about six months later, at that gold mine, I woke up one morning and realized I had dreamt in English. I'm sure these students will do the same very soon. I know they will be loyal and great Canadian citizens. I ask them to rise to be welcomed in this Assembly. MR. HIEBERT: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure to introduce to you and to members of the Assembly a gentleman who was involved with the petitioning committee, Mr. Chris Forbes. Mr.

Forbes is seated in the public gallery, and I ask him to rise and receive the traditional welcome of the House. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Abacus Cities Investigation MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my first question to the hon. Attorney General. Yesterday the Attorney General indicated that he was not able to reply to my question with respect to an RCMP recommendation that criminal charges be laid as a result of the lengthy police investigation into the Abacus Cities affair.

My question today: is the Attorney General in a position to confirm that the RCMP first made this recommendation approx imately a year ago and that the last meeting between officials of the minister's department and the RCMP on this matter occurred approximately two months ago? MR. CRAWFORD: No, Mr. Speaker, that would not be accu rate. The process that is under way, alluded to in part yesterday by my colleague the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, is a dual process.

The Securities Commission had directed certain extensive investigations and, although there is bound to be a certain amount of crossing over— indeed, it's very extensive crossing over — between the police in their investigation and the Securities Commission in theirs, they are separate processes, for separate purposes. The present standing of the matter is that the special pros ecutions branch is completing an assessment of material which has been provided. I expect that will take another couple of weeks.

I think that would be a minimum estimate of the time required to conclude an evaluation to the extent of providing finalized legal opinions, as distinct from the recommendations in respect of possible prosecutions that may or may not be in any report from the police force. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. In terms of the discussions between the RCMP com mercial crime division and the Attorney General's department, when did this matter first begin?

Was it in fact within approx imately the last year, and did the department receive a specific recommendation approximately two months ago? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I think my inquiries of my staff into the matter were not directed at exactly the same matters the Leader of the Opposition is interested in. With respect to time frames, I'm not able to be as precise as the hon. leader would like.

I can tell him, though, that the process has probably had the special prosecutions branch and the prin cipal members of the commercial crime division of the RCMP in Calgary, who have been carrying the investigation — prob ably the contacts and the interface of information and advice has gone on for a very long time indeed. I think the hon. leader shouldn't perceive it as being a simple sort of one- or two-step type of thing that's involved here. It's not just a matter of the police producing a report and recom mendations and presenting it.

There is a continuing interplay between the two agencies for a lot of the time that one of these very large and complex investigations is going on. In other words, information comes on a progressive basis. The legal counsel make observations and further inquiries, and then per haps the police themselves are redirected in the direction in which they have to look in order to examine the facts that would be most relevant to any potential prosecution. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. By the time frame, I would say that the information is coming on a conservative basis. Perhaps I could ask the hon.

Attorney General to be a little more specific. Is the minister saying that during the course of this period of time when information has come from the com mercial crime division and is being examined by the Attorney General's department, there have been directives that more study be undertaken, further investigation by the RCMP com mercial crime division? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I don't think I would speak of precisely what occurs in a specific instance and put time frames on it.

I don't mind saying to the hon. leader that, as I hinted earlier, because my inquiries of my staff were perhaps not directed at precisely the areas he is interested in, I simply do not have — it's not a matter of not wanting to tell the hon. member today; it's a matter of not having sought the sort of specific information he's asking about in respect of time frames. I meant to speak only of normal processes.

In such a complex and far-reaching case, it would surely be the situation that there would have to be consultations between legally trained people and investigators, in order that the police could assess through out, rather than just at the end of their work, the relevance and importance of the evidence they would be gathering. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'll follow that along a bit. Could the minister advise what policy considerations led to the snail like pace of the department in the Abacus matter, as opposed to the supersonic, weekend review of the Dial file? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, if I could be allowed to refer to it, which I'm not, I now perceive the intent in the hon. member's questioning. We deal only with facts here. In responding to him, I of course do the same thing: that is, the Abacus case is well known, I think throughout the country, as being one of the largest and most complex collapses of a large and complex financial organization that has ever occurred. I can assure the hon. leader that if he would go so far as to suggest that any direction from legal counsel caused any of the delays, he is surely mistaken.

It is the complexity and the difficulty of the matter under investigation. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Bear ing in mind that answer, could the minister outline for the Assembly the nature of ministerial briefings, in light of the minister's inability to advise the House yesterday that in fact

April 17, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 517 there had been a recommendation from the RCMP that pros ecution be proceeded with? MR. CRAWFORD: That's very simply done, Mr. Speaker. In the practicalities of the size of the organizations we speak of — the police forces and the Crown attorneys who advise in respect of these matters — the briefings I receive from the police, which are periodic and not regular, basically indicate the nature of the inquiries being made and the sort of quality of evidence they believe they're beginning to assemble, if not preliminary conclusions with respect to a particular investi gation.

If asked, they will always provide their best guess as to how much longer it will take. But that is not always a subject for discussion on each individual matter where a briefing is given. I think I've indicated to the hon. leader before that these briefings are not briefings on individual cases. In any single hearing, perhaps 25 such cases would be briefly sketched for my information. What happens, of course, is that at some point the matter moves from investigation to a report and recommendation.

Part of our practice is that, by the nature of the way the work is being done, that is not necessarily brought to me at once. The work is done by senior Crown counsel. It's part of the same process of getting it ready for a final decision. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Given the wide press coverage of this case and the controversy sur rounding it, has the Attorney General given any consideration to instructing department officials to move more quickly, in light of the precedent set by the Dial case? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I think it may have been referred to previously — I myself saw reference to it not long ago — that the views of the people who worked so hard in respect of that investigation, both in the police and in the department, after several years of investigation are not likely to be concerned over whether I'm able to say to the hon. leader today or next week what the result is, in other words, given the number of years involved — and I assure the hon. leader that the people conducting the investigation believed that length of time to be necessary — the matter of another week or so is surely not of critical significance.

MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, could I ask a supplementary question of the hon. Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Yesterday the minister took as notice my question regarding whether or not a certificate under

section 167(3) of the Securities Act had been issued in the matter of Abacus. Is the minister able to answer that question today? Further, could the minister advise the Assembly whether any such certificate has been issued with respect to Dial Mortgage? MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, it's my understanding that no such certificate has been issued. I'll have to take as notice the hon. member's question with respect to Dial Mortgage. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. Attorney General.

Could the Attorney General advise the Assembly whether the recommendations from the RCMP relate to senior management or the outside directors of Abacus? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, in any matters where it becomes known that there is an investigation, my view is only to indicate that there is a process under way — and indeed an investigation — and that one way or another it will come to fruition in a timely way. To be more specific with respect to individual citizens who people might be invited to speculate about if I were to answer the hon. leader's question, is some thing I should not do. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary on this topic. MR. NOTLEY: Then could the minister be a little more specific as to when the department will be in a position to respond to the RCMP recommendations? The minister said several weeks. Does that in fact mean two weeks, four weeks, six weeks, or several months? What in fact are we looking at in terms of a time frame? We all know the minister can act quickly when he chooses to, and he can also be very specific when he chooses to.

Is he in a position to perhaps advise the House more spe cifically what he as the Attorney General has indicated in his discussions in the last few hours? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I'd be pleased to respond quite specifically to that by giving the hon. leader my best estimate. In other words, if hon. members will appreciate that it's not an absolutely binding undertaking, my very best esti mate is two weeks. Seed Cleaning Plant — Minburn County MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Agriculture, I'd like to direct my second question to the other member who has a firm grasp of agricultural matters, the hon. Provincial Treasurer. It's with respect to the seed cleaning plant in the county of Minburn. I don't want him to get into the debate over a replacement rather than a regional plant, but I am rather interested in exploring with the hon. Provincial Treasurer the policy of this government with respect to funding projects where a feasibility study has not been put in place. MR. HYNDMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I just recently got in from the back 40 . . .

DR. BUCK: You've never seen the back 40, Lou. MR. HYNDMAN: . . . and I'm not fully prepared with regard to that question. But I think I might be able to offer further comment if the hon. leader could be more specific as to what area of government involvement he's talking about in that financing. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I can see that he's just come in from a tractor there. I would just outline to the minister the approximately $400,000 the government has committed to this project: 40 percent of it from province of Alberta, 40 percent from the association, and 20 percent from the county of Min burn. Mr.

Speaker, my question to the minister is whether the government has in place any policy that a feasibility study must be conducted before we make that kind of investment in cost- sharing ventures of this nature. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, knowing that the hon. member would want to have total accuracy in the answer — as would I — and in the absence of the Minister of Agriculture, I'll take the question as notice. MR. NOTLEY: I'm sure he will.

518 ALBERTA HANSARD April 17, 1984 Mr. Speaker, with his immense grasp of agricultural issues, could the hon. Provincial Treasurer inform the House what the policy of the government is, generally, with respect to public tendering of projects in which there is significant Alberta government participation? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I think that is largely a ques tion for the Minister of Public Works, Supply and Services. Tendering is largely an element which is found within that department and a few others. Perhaps he would wish to com ment in that regard. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr.

Speaker, with regard to Public Works tenders, the policy is to publicly advertise and tender. Assuming there are bidders, the job is then awarded to the low tenderer. MR. NOTLEY: That's very nice, Mr. Speaker. That was a nice side step there. However, I'd like to direct to the hon. Provincial Treasurer the question as to whether or not there are any rules in place that where provincial funds are made available on a cost-sharing basis with private-sector concerns, one of the conditions of public participation is open public tendering. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will have to be more specific.

I don't know whether he's talking about a Crown corporation, a board, an agency, or a commission. There are various rules and regulations with respect to each of those. The basic policy is set forth in the laws passed by this Legislature in previous years and the regulations made there under. So in a general way, it would be impossible to give all that information in less than a couple of hours, and I'd require a couple of days away from the farm in order to acquire it. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. I'm sure the minister will have an opportunity to do that in the next 12 days or so.

I would just advise him that I'm talking about the seed cleaning plant in the county of Minburn. The policy issue is the one I would like some clarification on. To the minister's knowledge, are there any guidelines in place as to public tendering of projects, in this particular instance with respect to a seed cleaning project in Minburn but generally in whatever private-sector involvement the government considers? MR. HYNDMAN: Again, Mr. Speaker, in order to be accurate with respect to the answer, I'll take the question as notice and provide one for the hon. member that will be complete.

Container Port Facility MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of Economic Development is with regard to a container port in Alberta, specifically Edmonton. Could the minister indicate whether that project is possible in Alberta, or proceeding? MR. PLANCHE: It is possible, Mr. Speaker. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. I know the minister would like to advise us as to what kinds of meetings have been held. Has the minister dealt with persons in Alberta to further this project and make it a possibility in this province? MR. PLANCHE: I'm not sure I understand the question.

Of course, there has been a great deal of conversation about having our rates as competitive as they can be from here to tidewater. At this stage the project is not site specific. There's more negotiation to do with the railways. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. Has the department followed through with any type of feasibility study with regard to this project? If so, can that feasibility study material be made available? MR. PLANCHE: Yes, Mr. Speaker, a fairly comprehensive study has been done.

We haven't released it publicly at this stage because, in terms of our negotiations with the carriers, it's important that we proceed one step at a time without reveal ing a whole game plan as it develops. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Could the minister indicate what type of employment possi bilities would occur because of the implementation of this proj ect? Are there any projections at this time? MR. PLANCHE: In itself, Mr. Speaker, it won't be a very large employer.

At the conclusion of the negotiations and the implementation of a port, should it come to fruition, we hope the decrease in freight rates will cause a great deal of employ ment. It will increase the competitive advantage of all those in Alberta who are shippers. But the port in itself won't be a very large employer. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary with regard to export growth potential.

In terms of the examinations the minister or the department has done at this time, has the export growth potential in Alberta made it possible for this project to proceed, or is our growth potential inadequate at this time and possibly in the future? MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, the forecast growth of freight volumes west and east is done extensively and continuously by the department. The area of activity the container port partic ularly addresses is that of shipments by container.

That revolves around petrochemicals, cut lumber, and agricultural products of great variety, so the future is very bright for all those in container traffic. It's also important to notice that last year, for the first time, more goods were shipped from Canada into the Pacific basin than into the Atlantic. So the whole trade shift is on in Canada, and we're right in the middle of that activity. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Would the minister consider tabling that feasibility study at the appropriate time?

I don't think anybody wants to interfere with the discussions going on, but would the minister undertake that commitment? MR. PLANCHE: The date is off in the future. I'd be happy to entertain the question again. When the negotiations are con cluded, there will be no reason for it not to be tabled, although at that time it might not even be useful. Loan Guarantees MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my question to the Attorney General.

It's in response to a recent request to his department by a representative of Alberta's business commu nity to curtail the powers of banks in enforcing personal guar antees pledged to cover a company's business loans. My question is: can the minister advise if any consideration has been given to repealing the Alberta Guarantees Acknowledg ment Act?

April 17, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 519 MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, not at the present time. I'd be interested in the views of anyone who thought repealing that particular legislation would in any way assist them with respect to dealings with financial institutions. It is really there for the commendable reason of giving people at least some assurance that if a guarantee is to be signed, the person appreciates what he has signed. That's the whole purpose of that legislation. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. Perhaps we can pursue this some more.

As a minimum support response to reduce the onerous debt load potential for Alberta's small busi ness community, is the minister prepared to amend the Act's requirement for signatory examination by a notary public and replace it with the protection for both parties to an agreement, which is offered by British Columbia's practice of independent legal advice? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, very often the notary's cer tificate is in fact completed by a lawyer and, therefore, is independent legal advice the person is receiving.

It is of interest, though, to see that since numbers of those certificates are com pleted by notaries public who would not be in the same position as a lawyer to give legal advice at all, that may well be worth looking at. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. Can the Attorney General advise whether any review was conducted of legislation in other jurisdictions in Canada with which to compare the Alberta Act, which I understand to be unique in setting out how courts shall respond to a lender's demand for enforcement? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I don't know what the hon. member is speaking of when he speaks of the legislation attempting to determine how the courts would deal with a lender's demand for payment. Obviously the document itself determines the rights of the parties. The legislation is directed only at seeing that a person has some warning, under that particular legislation, as to what he might be getting into. The hon. member made one point which I think is worthy of examination — and I'm not able to tell him, by way of comparison with all other jurisdictions, exactly how it's done in other jurisdictions.

The point remains that the idea of inde pendent legal advice would indeed be a further safeguard. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. Can the Attorney General identify those circumstances in the marketplace which require the continuance of this Act? I bring this up as it's my understanding that we are the only [province] that has

an Act like this at this particular time. MR. SPEAKER: With great respect, it would seem to me that this is a legal opinion. The effect of the hon. member's question is to ask to what occurrences or practices in the marketplace the Act applies, and that would be a matter for a legal opinion. While I'm on my feet, and by way of exception — we don't ordinarily do this in question period — might I suggest that we interrupt the running of the clock to permit an opportunity to introduce some distinguished guests who have just arrived in my gallery. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, I have the honour to introduce to you today a most distinguished delegation from the People's Republic of China. They're visiting our province at this time to represent their country at the Great Trade Show of China, which opened this past Saturday, April 14, and which will continue in the capital city of this province until May 5. Alberta, and Edmonton Northlands, has been honoured by being the site of this exhibition, which is the largest of its kind held outside of China. Mr.

Speaker, with your permission and the permission of members of the Assembly, I would like to make the introduc tions in two parts, first of all to introduce to you the Ambassador of the People's Republic of China, who is visiting Alberta for the first time since his arrival in Canada in the fall last year. He is accompanied by his gracious wife. Mr. Speaker and members of the Assembly, please welcome His Excellency Yu Zhan, Ambassador to Canada of the People's Republic of China, and Madam Zuo Yi, as well as the Second Secretary. Mr. An Wenbin. Would they rise and be welcomed by the Assembly. [applause] Mr.

Speaker, as you know, Alberta enjoys a flourishing and very special relationship with the province of Heilongjiang in China. I hope the interpreter can make the comment, which is ad libbed, that I hope they notice the flags that are at all our tables. Similarities in geography and resources between the two provinces provide the basis for extensive co-operation across a variety of areas, especially in agriculture, petroleum tech nology, education, and culture.

Heilongjiang is being featured at this Great Trade Show of China, and we're very pleased to have this very senior delegation from that province with us here. I'm pleased to introduce to you the leaders of this delegation. The delegation is led by Mr. Li Li'an, senior adviser to the government of Heilongjiang; Mr. Wang Yiaochen, director of the Heilongjiang foreign affairs bureau; Mr. Zhang, secretary of the Heilongjiang People's government; Mr. Cheng, director of the Heilongjiang economic research centre; Mr.

Liu, chair man of the Heilongjiang Planning Commission; and my dear friend, who travelled with me for 19 days, Mr. Wang, deputy director of the Europe-America division of the Heilongjiang foreign affairs bureau. Members of the Legislative Assembly, please join me in welcoming to our Assembly this distinguished group. [applause] head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Loan Guarantees (continued) MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, that's the most enthusiastic response I've ever had in the middle of my questions. My supplementary question is to the Minister of Tourism and Small Business and has to do with a similar topic.

Can the minister advise on his department's policy on securing guar antees for any loans made to Alberta companies from government programs under his jurisdiction? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, in relation to the information — I assume that was the question — relative to how the process evolves, the client always has the choice of their legal counsel or, in the case of AOC, AOC's legal counsel, and that is indicated to them. If by chance they should use AOC's legal

520 ALBERTA HANSARD April 17, 1984 counsel, they have a witness there as well. So there is a witness besides the legal counsel for the Alberta Opportunity Company. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. Specifically, is the certificate of notary public from the Alberta Guarantees Acknowledgment Act forced on business loan applicants, or is it different from the banks we've been talking about? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, I would have to take that as notice, but I'm not aware of anything being forced on anyone. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question dealing with this serious problem.

Is the minister prepared to use the influence of his office to lobby Alberta lending institutions for a less stringent practice of loans enforcement, as a means of easing the pressure on faltering businesses in Alberta and to restore some measure of confidence to the private sector? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, I have a little difficulty with the intent of the question. Is it relative to loans, loan guarantees, or personal guarantees? I wonder if that could be clarified. MR. MARTIN: Loans enforcement, Mr. Speaker. MR.

ADAIR: The private-sector business community that we live in — not just in the province of Alberta, Mr. Speaker, but in Canada and many countries in the world — operates on the basis that if you borrow money by way of a loan, then you have an obligation to in fact pay that back. That's in good times and in bad times. Certainly one of the things we have a concern about is the method, if in fact there is a difference in method between the good times and the bad times. At this point we have no evidence of that. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. Would the minister follow up on this?

We are getting some information that indi cates the practices have changed. MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member has some information, I'd be pleased to receive it. I might say that the staff of the small business division of the Department of Tour ism and Small Business keeps a very close eye on that particular area, as well as on any other area relating to small business. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary. MR. MARTIN: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister consider lobbying his federal leader about this matter?

Seeing that the federal Conservative leader was formerly a director of the Royal Bank, he might give us some good advice. MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, if there is the intent to lobby any person, we'd be more than delighted to in fact do that. I should keep in mind that our particular principle at this stage is to monitor very closely the actions and reactions in the business community, to ensure that the best possible scenario is there for the businessman. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Buffalo, and then I believe the hon.

Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs wishes to supplement some information that was sought in a previous question period. Restaurant Liquor Licensing MR. LEE: Mr. Speaker, being a Lee and considered part-time Chinese, it's a pleasure to follow on the heels of that distin guished introduction. My question is to the hon. Solicitor General.

Is the minister aware of a recent decision of the Alberta Liquor Control Board to change the closing hours for outdoor restaurants from 1 a.m. to 10 p.m., and is he willing to ask the ALCB to reconsider that decision, in view of the adverse impact on some 56 Calgary restaurants, many of which are located in the constituency of Calgary Buffalo, and some 120 restaurants provincewide? DR. REID: Mr.

Speaker, I understand there were some prob lems and some complaints of excessive noise from some of these outdoor restaurants, and it was probably that which led to the action of the Alberta Liquor Control Board in suggesting a restriction of the hours. I think we all enjoy the privilege of eating outdoors in the beautiful, typical Alberta April weather we've been enjoying. It is a privilege, and I suppose we all have to take some respon sibility with that privilege. Perhaps what I could do is take the opportunity at the moment to remind both patrons and licensees of that responsibility that goes with it.

I'm also pleased to tell the hon. member that I've already taken some action and discussed this with the members of the Alberta Liquor Control Board, and can assure members that, in 1984, constituents and indeed visitors to the province can continue to enjoy hours as they did in previous years. MR. LEE: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Could the minister indicate when all quiet constituents in Alberta can expect to return to the original privilege of 1 o'clock in the morning? DR. REID: As soon as we get the notification out to the licen sees. DR. BUCK: Check Stop. MR. LEE: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

To avoid this kind of situation occurring in the future, would the minister provide for a preconsultative process — perhaps via the Alberta res taurant association — such that these kinds of matters could be dealt with amiably, rather than requiring a decision and then reconsideration of a decision? DR. REID: Mr. Speaker, it is my suggestion that we will use the advisory council to perform that preconsultative function. The concept would be that prior to implementation, any changes that might affect the restaurant industry or the tourist industry in general would be reviewed by the members of that council.

Health Spa Membership Sales MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. Member for Clover Bar asked a question related to selling health club memberships, and whether any complaints about the tactics being used had been registered with the department. For the hon. member's information, we don't have any complaints related directly to that topic. But I would ask if that member has information that relates to direct selling, door-to-door. Cer tainly the Direct Sales Cancellation Act comes into play there.

If a concern about a possibility of misrepresentation has been registered with the hon. member, the department would be most interested in dealing with that under the Unfair Trade Practices Act.

April 17, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 521 Women's Issues MR. GOGO: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister responsible for Personnel Administration. It arises from the annual report of the Public Service Commissioner, tabled in this House yesterday. With the announcement by the government — in Vote 8 of Executive Council, I believe — of a minister responsible for the Women's Secretariat, would the continuation of the women's program carried out by Per sonnel Administration be a duplication of efforts by the government of Alberta, related to women's issues? MR. STEVENS: Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Advanced Edu cation may wish to supplement my remarks. The new Women's Secretariat has as its focus the evaluation of policies, programs, and legislation that affect women,

whereas the Personnel Administration office women's program is to assist female employees in career development, career orientation, and new opportunities for the public service. I believe the program that Personnel Administration will continue to follow will be com plementary to the efforts of the Women's Secretariat. MR. GOGO: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. I see that the participation for women, as a percentage of the total work force, increased some 10 percent and that the number of grievances has tended to increase.

Of the approximately 600 grievances lodged last year under the public service relations division, could the minister advise the House how many were on behalf of women, if indeed records are kept as to the sex? MR. SPEAKER: If it should happen that by some coincidence the minister has this information, perhaps we could deal with it briefly. It would seem to be a question of such detail, and relating to statistics, that it might find its way to the Order Paper. MR. GOGO: Mr. Speaker, with regard to grievances lodged by employees, as a matter of policy does the minister keep records as to the sex? MR. STEVENS: Mr.

Speaker, I would have to determine that. I expect that the answer will be no; it will be on the basis of the type of grievance, the location as to department, and classi fication. Sulphur Emissions Control DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, my question to the hon. Minister of the Environment has to do with the Alberta government's decision not to participate in the group making a commitment to cut acid rain. Can the minister indicate what studies were done by the minister's department to not participate with the other provinces in the commitment to cut sulphur dioxide emis sions, to lower the acid rain situation? MR.

BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, I have dealt with this question previously in the House, but I could reiterate the conclusions of the ministers of the environment of the country. Basically, a target level of wet sulphur deposition of 20 kilograms per hectare was arrived at by the ministers of the environment; also, in terms of discussions with the United States, that this would be a desirable level to which to reduce sulphate depo sition in the country. Since Alberta has been well below that level, it was not necessary for us to participate in a program to reduce sulphate deposition to this 20 kilogram per hectare level.

Over the last five years, I believe we have been monitoring this matter. Our levels have been averaging somewhere around 10 kilograms per hectare, which does not require us to reduce our emissions. We are well below the level which has been agreed upon. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, in light of that information, can the minister indicate what studies have been done in his department to indicate to Albertans and Canadians how many plants we can have in the Fort McMurray area before sulphur emission becomes a problem? MR. BRADLEY: Mr.

Speaker, we have the very extensive Alberta oil sands environmental research program, which was set up by our government and the government of Canada back in the early development stage of the oil sands program and which has a mandate to give us baseline data with regard to that specific. It's an ongoing program, and there are research programs designed underneath that program.

We are also engaged with the federal government and governments of the western provinces — British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, the Northwest Territories, and the Yukon — on a western long-range transport of acid precipitants research program, to which we are the major contributors. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. minister. The question was, how many plants can we have in the Fort McMurray area before sulphur dioxide emissions become a problem? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, at the present time I guess I can only comment on the situation to date.

I have described the wet sulphate deposition measurement, which is the criterion for a national action program. I have described that we have ongoing research in that area. It will be that research that will in fact determine and give us the information upon which to base the decision the hon. member is asking for. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, when will the minister be able to tell the Assembly, the people of this province, and the people of Canada, how many plants we can put in that area before, say, Saskatchewan's fertile land is affected? MR. BRADLEY: Mr.

Speaker, at this point in time, I can only comment that there is not a problem with regard to acid pre cipitation in the western provinces, being Saskatchewan and Alberta. I have described the criterion, and I have described that there is an ongoing research program in that particular area to get the necessary baseline data. Given the information we have to date, there is not a problem at this point in time. The research program is designed to give us the information the hon. member is requesting. Seed Cleaning Plant — Minburn County (continued) MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to direct this ques tion to the hon. Minister of Agriculture. We dealt with general questions with the Provincial Treasurer, but I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Agriculture: with respect to the seed clean ing plant in the county of Minburn, can the minister advise what feasibility studies were completed before the government committed $400,000 to this particular project? MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, since it was approved prior to my taking over this portfolio, I would be happy to check into it and report back.

522 ALBERTA HANSARD April 17, 1984 MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a supple mentary question. During his review, could the minister also determine whether or not the project was subject to open tender? MR. FJORDBOTTEN: I would be happy to check into that, Mr. Speaker. MR. BATIUK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. Could the Min ister of Agriculture advise whether the county of Minburn has the first seed cleaning that is going to be replaced, or are there more of them? MR.

SPEAKER: I wonder if that is information which is within the official duty of the minister to deal with or whether it's just a matter of research. DR. BUCK: Ask the MLA, John. MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. minister is aware of information he has in his department which is not generally available, then I'm sure he'd like to answer the question. MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, could I ask the hon. mem ber to clarify. Did he ask how many seed plants had been replaced? DR. BUCK: Next month in caucus, John. MR. BATIUK: Mr.

Speaker, I asked if the Minister of Agri culture could advise whether other seed cleaning plants have been replaced in the province or whether it was just the county of Minburn. I know there is enough reason that the hon. Leader of the Opposition is concerned about Minburn. MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, there are other plants that have been replaced, and I will be happy to include that infor mation when I report back. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. HORSMAN: Mr.

Speaker, with respect to questions and motions, I move that Question 165 and Motion for a Return 162 stand and retain their respective places on the Order Paper. [Motion carried] head: WRITTEN QUESTIONS 168 Mr.

Notley asked the government the following question: With regard to the statement made in the Assembly on Thurs day, April 5, 1984, by the Associate Minister of Public Lands and Wildlife, and concerning the management decision to reduce the processing time for geophysical well site and road way application approvals in the Footner Lake and Peace River forests from 10 days to three days during the period January 12, 1984, to January 26, 1984:

(1) For the period during which the three-day processing time was in effect: (

a) how many applications were awaiting a decision at the commencement of the period, (

b) how many applications were received during the period. (

c) how many applications were processed to the point of a decision being made during the period, and (

d) of the applications processed, how many were approved, how many were returned to the applicant for alterations or other concerns, and how many were rejected?

(2) Again with regard to the Footner Lake and Peace River forests, in each case for the periods December 29, 1983, to January 12, 1984; December 15, 1983, to December 29, 1983; December 1, 1983, to December 15, 1983; and November 17, 1983, to December 1, 1983: (

a) how many applications were awaiting a decision at the commencement of each period, (

b) how many applications were received during each period, (

c) how many applications were processed to the point of a decision being made during each period, and (

d) of the applications processed, how many were approved, how many were returned to the applicant for alterations or other concerns, and how many were rejected in each period?

(3) Have similar management decisions involving a reduction in the processing time for geophysical well site and road way applications been made since November 2, 1982, with regard to any other forests and, if so and in each case, during what period of time were these management decisions in effect and what was the period of processing time reduced to? MR. SPARROW: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the government, we will accept Question 168. head: MOTIONS FOR RETURNS 160. Mr. Notley moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing, with regard to the Luscar Sterco mine on Coal Creek near the Lovett River operated by Luscar Sterco

(1977) Ltd. and/or Luscar Ltd.: (1) copies of all information, as the term is meant in

section 18.1(1) of the Clean Water Act, received by the government from the permit holder for the mine, where such information arises as a result of monitoring under taken by the permit holder between January 1, 1982, and March 1, 1984, inclusive; (2) copies of the results of any and all water sample tests undertaken by officials of, employees of, or persons acting on behalf of either the fish and wildlife division of the Department of Energy and Natural Resources or the pol lution control division of the Department of the Environ ment, where the water samples were taken from the Lovett River at a site or sites near the mine between January 1, 1982, and March 1, 1984, inclusive, and specifically including such water sample test results where those results measured (

a) unusually heavy siltation and/or the major constit uent substances in the silt measured, (

b) flocculation and the nature of the flocculants sam pled, and (

c) the incidence of other substances otherwise foreign to the river in the concentrations found, and, (3) copies of any certificates of variance, water quality control orders, or stop orders issued by the Minister of the Envi ronment under the Clean Water Act to the permit holder for the mine, where such certificates or orders were issued

April 17, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 523 with an effective date between January 1, 1982, and March 1, 1983, inclusive. [Motion carried] 161. Mr. Notley moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing: (1) copies of the directive issued on March 25, 1983, to Luscar Sterco

(1977) Ltd. and/or Luscar Ltd. as a result of the meeting between officials of the pollution control division of the Department of the Environment and officials of the company on March 22, 1983; and (2) copies of any other similar directives issued to the com pany from the time of the commissioning of the Luscar Sterco mine on Coal Creek near the Lovett River to March 1, 1984. [Motion carried] 167. Mr.

Notley moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing, with regard to the tax assessment notices sent to the members of the Lubicon Lake Indian Band last fall: (1) the number of notices to which no response has been received; and (2) the number of notices to which, in each case, the following responses have been received: (

a) responses indicating disagreement over the amount of assessment but not otherwise indicating a reluct ance to pay assessed taxes, (

b) responses indicating disagreement over the amount of assessment and indicating a reluctance or refusal to pay assessed taxes, (

c) responses not indicating disagreement over the amount of assessment and not indicating a reluctance or refusal to pay assessed taxes, (

d) responses not indicating disagreement over the amount of assessment but indicating a reluctance or refusal to pay assessed taxes, and (

e) rude responses (it is understood that this category may feature some overlap with one or more of the other categories). MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, I propose an amendment to Motion 167 and would recommend for the Assembly's con sideration the deletion of the words "with regard to the tax assessment notices sent to the members of the Lubicon Lake Indian Band last fall" and the substitution therefor of the words "with regard to the tax notices sent to residents of the hamlet of Little Buffalo in improvement district 17 last fall". [Motion as amended carried] MR. KOZIAK: Mr.

Speaker, at the same time, I would like to table the reply to the motion just adopted by the Assembly. head: MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS 209. Moved by Mr. Musgreave:

Be it resolved that the Assembly urge the government to con sider establishing an Alberta advisory council on the status of women to advise the government on matters relating to women and to bring before the public and government, matters of inter est and concern to women. MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to speak today on Motion 209. First though, I'd like to congrat ulate the government and the Hon. Dick Johnston for assuming the responsibility of the Alberta Women's Bureau, which he then turned into a Women's Secretariat. This secretariat is headed by Dr.

Sheila Wynn, who has had a long interest in women's affairs and can be counted on for top performance. I notice that in the members gallery today we have Phyllis Ellis, the former director of our Women's Bureau. I would like to commend her for the hard work she's done on behalf of the women of this province, with limited resources, for a long period of time. There are of course some of my colleagues who wonder why women still want an agency outside of government to work on behalf of women. To them I say, put your political hats on and listen carefully.

Flora MacDonald pointed out in a recent speech that 52 percent of voters are women and political parties are finally recognizing the importance of women. Brian Mulroney said to the PC women's caucus in March: we need you to take an equal

part in shaping your party's plans and policies; we need you to share your skills, your knowledge, your commitment, and your vision. Even John Turner is now saying that if he becomes leader of the Liberals, he will support affirmative action on equal pay for equal work and new job opportunities in management in government circles. These things have been said before, but as women become more aware of the need to get into the political system as politicians, there will be changes made for the better.

In sug gesting a status of women advisory council, which I think should report to the minister responsible for [women's] affairs, I ask the members to consider the following. By having outside of government an independent organization that has a broad representation of women's concerns in the province, the min ister, his secretariat, or any women's bureaus could be sup ported in this work on behalf of women.

It could more easily take the pulse of women and of the associations that represent them and provide opinions which take into account the real situation of women, without worrying about the political over tones. For these reasons the status of women could play an important role despite the presence of the internal organizations such as women's bureaus or women's secretariats set up by government to deal with feminist concerns. Responsibilities would not be duplicated and conflicts of interest would not arise, because the role and responsibility of each would be different.

On the one hand, the council on the status of women, being an advisory body, would not be part of the government machinery and would not have to be keenly concerned with administrative and budget problems which must, after all, remain a consideration for people working within the structure of government, nor would it have to take the political aspects of the issues into account in the same way as does a minister who belongs to a political party and is elected as part of a governing group with a specific program. In addition, Mr.

Speaker, the council will be able to tell women about their rights and provide them with the support they need in forming groups to assert these rights. It is easy to see how a government which tried to carry out these respon sibilities, perhaps through a minister responsible for the status of women, would readily be accused of attempting to use women for propaganda purposes. The council would not have this restraint. I feel that women's role in society should be equal to that of men, and they should achieve that because of their personal ability, not because they are females. Regrettably, this is not the case.

All we need to do is look at the membership in this House or the number of women holding executive posts in

524 ALBERTA HANSARD April 17, 1984 government. Even more distressing is the fact that where women have achieved senior positions, we have examples where men are paid more for doing the same kind of work. Every day there are reports of women being treated unfairly in our society. This can be the result of discrimination by organ izations, by rules, or by frustration on the part of women because the battle is so difficult and constant.

As a result of considerable input from concerned women, today I have my motion to ask the government to consider the establishment of an Alberta advisory council on the status of women. I'd like to suggest to my colleagues that we don't have all the best ideas in Canada. Therefore when members consider this proposal, I urge them to reflect on the value of the idea, not whose idea it was originally. Many provincial governments which are Conservative have adopted this program. To me, it is a political decision but one we should make with care. I personally regret the need for these councils.

But women's organizations, from Unifarm in the country to university women's groups in our cities, support the idea. They represent approximately 50,000 women in 60 organizations throughout our province. I urge my colleagues to consider that while Alberta and British Columbia do not have councils, every other province recognizes the role of women in various ways. The province that has the most dramatic and positive program is Quebec. There they have a Minister responsible for Women's Affairs, a budget of over $2 million, and several women's bureaus and secretariats.

But most importantly, the department of Women's Affairs must assess every document that goes to cabinet for a decision as to the implications with regard to women in the province of Quebec. I'd like to give you some examples of recent occurrences of which I have been made aware and which should cause all members to give this motion serious consideration. The reasons for the battle for women to play their full role in areas of society can be emphasized by reviewing some past events here in Canada.

But first, to my female colleagues who say any woman can do what she wants: let me remind you that the pressures today are more subtle, more difficult to fight and, now that we are in a recession, even more constant than they were before. I urge you to remember that at one time in Canada it was against the law for women to vote, they could not practise law, they could not practise medicine, and they could not sit in our Senate. There are some specific examples of how the struggle is being waged.

The Canadian labour council union leaders will recommend at their annual meeting in Montreal next month that the membership on their council be expanded to 32, with 10 of the seats being reserved for women. In 1981 the New Democrats came into office in Manitoba; this is the party that touts itself as the champion of women. I see that some of the Liberals who are hoping to become party leader are doing the same thing.

Referring to the province of Manitoba, in the past three years while this new government has been in power, the number of women in the Manitoba civil service has dropped, and the wage gap between male and female workers is now 30 percent,

whereas previously it was lower. In Ontario it is only 20 percent. In February of this year, a brief on domestic violence pre pared by the Grande Prairie Women's Residence Association, on behalf of the Alberta Council of Women's Shelters, pointed out that domestic violence is a problem touching all commu nities in Alberta. Another revealing study is the one prepared by Concerned Citizens on Prostitution and Pornography, which points out the human suffering of victims of prostitution and pornography here in the city of Edmonton.

Finally to my rural colleagues, I would like to emphasize the uphill battle being faced by farm women. Alice Brown and her husband, who farm east of Balzac and jointly own a farm corporation, applied for a $30,000 grant under the Prairie Grain Advance Payments Act. In due course half the money turned up. Alice Brown discovered that the Canadian Wheat Board deems a man to be a man, while his wife and minor children are mere appendages. If the Browns had been brother and sister, they would have had no problem. They would have received the full amount of the grant. Mrs.

Brown wrote letters on this situation to everyone she could think of including Gordon Tay lor, who used to be a member of this Legislature. Gordon even introduced a private member's Bill in the House of Commons, but we know what happens to those. Her efforts have paid off, however, because Parliament is now moving to increase the advance ceiling and also to consider husband and wife as sep arate citizens. Of course the problem of Mrs. Brown reveals the fact that the contribution of women to making a farm successful is not recognized by many people.

A recent issue of the Alberta Women's Bureau pointed out the inequities in everything from the Canada Pension Plan to credit. Recent surveys find 60 percent of farm women express financial concern and that almost half of the province's farm families have someone work ing off-farm to provide cash income. This means that farm women often end up with three jobs: a salaried position off- farm, their household work, and their farm work. Again, let's go back to the political message. Almost every day you can read in the papers about issues affecting women.

Just recently in Calgary, a federal nomination was won by a woman. Hopefully, there will be more. To those of you who feel complacent about this important issue: you stand a chance of being challenged at the next election, not by a sacrificial candidate put up by one of the opposition parties; rather, you'll probably be challenged at your own nomination meeting in your own Progressive Conservative constituency association.

I hope you will take my words and think on them carefully, because I believe the struggle on behalf of women is becoming more apparent to women, not only those that are organized but those that are not organized. In supporting this Bill, you will be helping the women of this province play their full role as citizens in whatever career they choose. I urge you to vote, and I urge you to vote wisely. Thank you. MR. SZWENDER: I welcome the opportunity to participate in the debate today on Motion 209. I'd like to begin by com mending the Member for Calgary McKnight for bringing this motion before the Assembly.

I know he previously brought a similar one before us and is still pursuing this very timely and worthy motion. I was quite pleased to have the opportunity to participate in the debate, because my interest in women's issues has been long-standing. I was able to put some of that into affirmative action by introducing a motion last spring on spouse battering, which I believe raised the issue fairly well in the communities of Alberta. I received a lot of positive response to that motion.

I was also very pleased to participate on behalf of the Minister of Advanced Education in the opening of the Sheriff King shelter for battered women in Calgary. I think all these events are certainly significant in their contribution to alleviating some of the problems facing our society. As I look at the wording of the motion presented by the Member for Calgary McKnight, I notice that instead of it read ing that the Assembly urge the government to establish an Alberta advisory council, it simply refers to "the government

April 17, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 525 to consider establishing an Alberta advisory council". Mr. Speaker, I have absolutely no problem with the idea of con sidering anything. I think this is welcome in the Assembly, in order to give all members an equal opportunity to express themselves in considering this. The way the motion is worded may leave some individuals of the province wondering whether the Alberta government has done in the past, or is presently doing, enough with regard to the issue of women's concerns. I'd just like to look briefly at the history concerning women's issues and rights in Alberta.

I think Alberta has a very proud history they can refer to in the sequence of its accomplishments from the past. Some of these achievements, without exhausting the list completely, include the fact that in Alberta women were granted the franchise in April 1916, which was only a month or two after our sister provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan. So it was one of the forerunners in allowing the franchise to women at the provincial level. Alberta was also the first province to call women to the provincial Legislature.

Louise McKinney had the distinction of being the first woman to be elected to a legislature in Canada and in the British Empire. Here in the province of Alberta, we also had an Irene Parlby, who was the second cabinet minister appointed in the British Empire. Thirdly, Alberta was the first province to appoint women magistrates and judges of the juve nile court. In fact Emily Murphy was the first woman magistrate in the British Empire. Further, Mr.

Speaker, Alberta was the first to permit women the right to sit on municipal councils, as well as the first to give equality of suffrage in provincial and municipal affairs. Another example is to give absolute equality in parental rights within the marriage, and the list goes on. With that list, I believe we in Alberta have been forerunners in establishing the way for women to take an equal role in our society. I'd also like to briefly mention the very famous "persons case", which I think many members may already be familiar with. But I'd just like to refresh the memories of some who may not be.

This was a case that originated with an odious British common-law ruling of 1876, which ruled that women were persons in matters of payments and penalties but not persons in matters of rights and privileges. This caused much grief and consternation to the women of this country. The fight to change this ruling was led by Judge Emily Murphy, who headed a group of women known as the Famous Five, who fought in the Supreme Court of Canada with little success to that point and finally had to take the case all the way to the Privy Council of England, which was at that time Canada's highest court of appeal.

On October 18, 1929, the Lord Chancellor of the Privy Council announced the decision that women were indeed persons and were eligible to be sum moned and become members of the Senate of Canada. I think that's an extremely proud achievement for five pioneer Alberta women. I would like to once again emphasize that I feel that in the past Alberta has been a front-runner in these rights, and the present Alberta government is doing a lot in meeting the current needs of women in our society.

I would like to again mention the appointment of the Women's Secretariat, under the Minister of Advanced Education, as mentioned by the previous speaker. This was announced on February 28, 1984. I believe the sec retariat will indeed alleviate many of the problems that may have existed previously and may funnel many of the concerns in such a way that our government will be able to respond accordingly. In case there are some individuals who still question the effectiveness of the secretariat, I could briefly go over some of the functions the secretariat will be fulfilling.

Number one, they are to provide enhanced co-ordination between, and liaison with, other government departments, since women's rights do not correspond to one specific government department but are intergovernmental. As such, that kind of co-ordination has to take place in order to ensure that women's concerns are reflected in the policies and programs of government. Also the secretariat is to analyze and review Alberta legislation, policies, and pro grams having special reference to women.

It is also to provide advice to the minister responsible for the status of women and to other government departments on matters related to women, provide a link to the community by collecting and disseminating information of interest to women, provide grants for research and educational events, and consult with women in the prov ince. Many of these functions had previously been performed by the Alberta Women's Bureau.

Also, for some of the purposes which I have already mentioned, there will be a couple of subcommittees of the Alberta secretariat: the cabinet committee on women's issues and the interdepartmental committee on women's issues. As I was preparing some notes for debate, Mr. Speaker, I browsed through my library and came up with a rather inter esting book. It's called A Short History of Women. It's a rather old book, in fact almost 60 years old, published in 1927. I found some very interesting comments in the book. Many of them are really quite contemporary with the problems facing women in our society today.

Without belabouring the Assembly — I certainly do not plan to read the whole book at this time. Knowing also that the Member for Barrhead will be speaking after me, I do know I'll have more time than is usually accorded to me when he speaks before me. However, I would like to refer briefly to a couple of items in the book which I thought were really quite interesting. One made reference to Mother's Day. I'm not sure exactly when Mother's Day originated. But it was in place at least in 1927, because the book makes reference to it.

Even at that time, there was serious concern about the preservation of the family unit, and for whatever reason — I guess some of it may have been commercial — a Mother's Day was established and is observed yearly. I still don't believe we need a special day to show someone we have a special love or care for them; however, we have that designated and its purpose is for that reason. It does make reference in this book to Mother's Day.

So even in that early time — although, as I say, it was only 60 years ago — there was concern that the family unit was disintegrating and that sons and daughters away from home would need a special day of reminder to call their mothers and let them know they're still there. Another interesting point that was brought up in the book — although some of my colleagues may take offence at my quoting a passage from Trotsky.

I don't intend to do it in that respect, other than that the Russian revolution had succeeded only about 10 years prior to the printing and publication of this book and obviously had a number of ideals and goals in mind. Certainly one of the intentions was to revolutionize the family. I find it quite interesting, Mr. Speaker, when I watch programs on the Soviet Union, when the camera spans their central com mittee and we look at the members there, that a society which purports to have total equality has probably a greater number of males in their assembly than we have in ours.

Out of the hundreds that were seated in that assembly, I saw one or two. So certainly the ideals that they espoused over 60 years ago have far from reached their fruition. As I say, I'd like to point out a paragraph in the book which highlights the attitude at that time. Trotsky, in his book Prob

526 ALBERTA HANSARD April 17, 1984 lems of Life, states that to institute the political equality of men and women in the Soviet Union was one problem and very simple. So to institute by legislation that people are equal did not take much of an achievement. The Soviet Union has done that, and all societies have done that. But that is not the prob lem. The problem is much more to put that into practice.

A much more difficult one was the next — that of insti tuting the industrial equality of men and women workers in the factories, the mills and the trade unions, and to do [so] in such a way that the men [would] not put the women to disadvantage. But to achieve the actual equality of men and women within the family is an infinitely more arduous problem. Mr. Speaker, I'm going to get to the family as a factor in a moment. Finally, I'd like to point out that he states: "We need more socialistic economic forms". I'm sure it will please all my colleagues to hear that.

Only under such conditions can we free the family from the functions and cares that now oppress and disintegrate it. Washing must be done by a public laundry, catering by a public restaurant, sewing by a public workshop. And so on and so forth. I think the goals of the Soviet Russian revolution have largely been achieved in a capitalist society without that revolution. The industrial revolution has achieved much of that, where many menial domestic tasks previously performed are now easily afforded and accorded in our society by outside sources, leaving the women more time to spend outside the home.

How good or bad that is is certainly open to debate. Mr. Speaker, if I could just move on to another point I'd like to make. In my role as an educator — I've been a teacher for about 10 years, most of that in high school — I'm pretty used to working with women. It was certainly a change when I came to the Legislature, where women were few and far apart. But they're certainly a welcome change from my male colleagues. About 60 percent of the teachers in this province are female. So through that alone, I think they have a great ability to influence change through the educational process.

I am totally of the belief that the educational process is the one which will most effectively bring about the objectives we're discussing today. There are other problems of course. As a teacher, especially at the high school level — by that time, most minds are fairly well formulated. Certainly there are differences, largely speak ing, in maturity levels between the males and the females. There is the problem of television and the types of stereotyping that it reinforces constantly.

So as a teacher, at least at the high school level, it really is an uphill battle to try to change many of these attitudes which have largely been formed. The changes have to occur much sooner, probably even in the preschool days, if they are going to be totally effective. Mr. Speaker, the long-term effect of education on a sophis ticated culture such as ours, in which there is less demand on sheer muscle, is to make males more feminine and females more masculine.

Historically, as the level of education rises, men become capable of greater tenderness, take an interest in domestic affairs, consider women their equal partners rather than their chattels, and take an interest in aesthetic matters. I hope all my colleagues are listening very closely. At the same time, women become less flighty and capricious, become more analytical and logical, assert their right to sexual equality, and enter traditionally male occupational fields. It is very important to note that these change patterns are transmitted culturally in the educated classes,

whereas the children of uneducated par ents move in this direction as they rise through the educational system. However, this is not to say that in the future, all sex dif ferences will be abolished. I personally find the direction of unisex appearance and fashion highly undesirable. I think appearance is still extremely important for our own self-worth. As a teacher, I've often been in an embarrassing position where I've confused females for males and males for females. You can well imagine the embarrassment that causes for the teacher and for those whose identity has been mistaken.

So if a person has that self-esteem, I do not wish that situation on anyone in terms of the embarrassment. However, returning to the importance of education in dimin ishing sex typing, it does imply that as parents, teachers, and social engineers, those of us in this room can see through the artificiality of some of our sex role expectations. We traumatize boys when we expect them to be cavemen living in a tech nological, educated, humane society.

We traumatize girls when we expect little from them in the way of intellect and creativity and when, on the other hand, we expect them to be passive, docile, accepting, and cast in traditional roles. Mr. Speaker, I maintain that only an educational system and its implementation will have the desired objectives, par ticularly in a society such as we have in Canada, in Alberta. It's a multicultural society. We are bringing together individ uals, people from all over the world, who have brought their own cultural norms and mores with them.

To blanket policy or behaviour on these people, all new Canadians, is certainly very difficult. This is one consideration that may be overlooked, that not everyone can be treated in the same way with the same types of expectations. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to conclude by just saying that although I consider this issue to be of great importance, as the MLA for Edmonton Belmont I have had a visible deficiency in contact from women's groups on this.

In fact I have to go so far as to say I have had no phone calls, letters, or personal representation asking me whether I would be supporting this motion or speak ing on it. It's that lack of communication or response that really makes me wonder how to assess the value of further government action in terms of creating new organizations, new groups to study the problems. I believe there are plenty of studies and lots of information readily available. I for one would like to see more action, a little less talk, and a few less meetings. With those few words, Mr.

Speaker, I would take my place and welcome ideas for some affirmative action from other speakers. [Two members rose] MR. SPEAKER: I believe the hon. Leader of the Opposition caught the Chair's eye first, if that isn't a mixed metaphor. MR. NOTLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I welcome the opportunity to participate in Motion No. 209, Mr. Speaker. I support the intent of the motion and hope during the course of this debate that the government members — opposition members too — keep their comments sufficiently brief that at the close of the afternoon session we can not only debate the issue but pass the motion.

It is perhaps worth drawing to the attention of those people in the gallery that there is an unfortunate tendency to debate issues to the point where a motion like this drops to the bottom of the Order Paper and unfortunately doesn't come back in time to be discussed later in the session. Bearing in mind the impor tance of this issue. I hope members will allow it not only to be debated but to actually come to a vote this afternoon.

April 17, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 527 Given the fact, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure some will say this is rushing it. Again, for those in the gallery who are observing today, this is an Assembly which passed some $3 billion in interim supply in a matter of about 35 seconds. We can move very quickly when we want to. After two hours of debate, if we're really in favour of this resolution rather than attempting to get a few brownie points, it will be possible to have not only a debate but a resolution of the issue. AN HON. MEMBER: Speak more quickly. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I want to make two or three points in support of an Alberta advisory council on the status of women. The first point is that one of the things we must do in the political process is encourage women — not just in the sort of traditional sense of saying, isn't it nice that we have a few women candidates — to take an active role in the political process by seeking nomination and winning election to office.

As a matter of fact, one of the things I'm quite proud of within the party I represent is that at our recent national convention in Regina, an affirmative action resolution was passed which changed the constitution of the party and recognized for the first time what we call "gender parity" in the election of our senior officers. While some people were rather shocked when this proposal was made and worried about its impact, I must say that the result has been extremely effective in terms of the input at the national executive level of the party.

I think the argument that affirmative action somehow leads to the lowest common denominator is simply wrong. We're never going to reach any kind of gender parity in this country unless we push a bit. We can have all kinds of nice, gratuitous comments over and over again. But as long as we don't move beyond that, the role of women in politics will be preparing the coffee and serving the doughnuts, while in fact the men continue to make the real decisions. And that isn't good enough, Mr. Speaker. It isn't good enough in any of the national parties, and it isn't good enough in any of the provincial parties.

It's unfortunate that in this particular Assembly, while we have some distinguished women members, we don't have any thing like enough. I challenge the parties in Alberta, starting with my own party. As we select candidates in the New Dem ocratic Party, we're making it clear that we want to attract top women candidates and try to achieve a gender balance.

I say to the young Member for Edmonton Glengarry and the young Member for Edmonton Belmont, the Cook/King machine, who are so active in various interparty activities in the Conservative Party: as you go out seeking new candidates to replace some of these members in the House, go after women. Let's get some gender balance in this Legislative Assembly, because there are a lot of capable Conservative women we need in this Legis lature. We need some people in the Conservative Party who are prepared to do more than just talk about the issue, who get out there and make those changes at the nomination level. Mr.

Speaker, that's the first thing, getting more women elected to the Legislature of Alberta. The second thing is to deal with the issue of equal pay for equal work. MR. HORSMAN: How about the mayor of Fairview? MR. NOTLEY: I see that the hon. Member for Medicine Hat has finally chimed in here; it's nice to see that he's back. Mr. Speaker, there is one constituency where we could have a change in the gender balance and it wouldn't hurt at all. Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that the second issue . . . MR. HORSMAN: What about the mayor of Fairview? MR.

NOTLEY: No, not the mayor of Fairview, the mayor of Spirit River — the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovern mental Affairs has his towns mixed up. As a matter of fact, I might just say to the hon. minister that that is one place where they certainly could do no better in terms of selecting a can didate than the mayor of the town of Spirit River — a first- class person. But that's something that has to be undertaken by the hon. Tory members. MR. SZWENDER: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The hon.

Leader of the Opposition lectured the Assembly here on wasting time, and I hope he would stop and get back to the motion. MR. SPEAKER: Possibly I missed something, but I have great difficulty in seeing any waste of time in what the hon. Leader of the Opposition is saying. MR. MARTIN: You made a fool of yourself, Walter. MR. SPEAKER: It seems to me that what he is saying is pertinent to the subject under debate. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, thank you. I certainly will carry on.

Just one little passing comment for the the hon. member, knowing his interest in internal politics: the point I think people wish to have drawn to the attention of the movers and shakers in all parties is that we shouldn't just talk about women being in the Legislature, we should actively go out and recruit women candidates. For those who are as interested as some in nomi nation procedures, I bring that to their attention and underline it. The second thing I was going to say, Mr.

Speaker, is that we have the question of the working world and the difference in incomes between men and women and the difference in managerial opportunities for men and women. I think government has to take a lead. The hon. member who intro duced the resolution indicated that there had been a change in Manitoba. I don't know what the statistics are.

If that's true, I would say publicly in this House that I regret that very much, because surely one of the things we have to commit ourselves to, regardless of where we sit — let me speak directly and in a nonpartisan way on this item — is removing the differentials between working men and women, not only in the public sector but in the private sector. That's one of the things that is a major problem that perhaps an advisory council of this nature could help us come to grips with by making proposals for legislative change.

Bearing in mind my own stricture that we want to have as much debate as possible but come to a vote, I would close by urging hon. members this afternoon to support Motion No. 209. MRS. CRIPPS: Mr. Speaker, the last speaker just proved that the Speaker of the House is unbiased and that he sees men and women as equal, because we both stood up at the same time and, as the hon. Member for Barrhead said, there's no chivalry left. MR. SPEAKER: As a matter of fact, if I could have done it, I would have recognized the hon. member for Drayton Valley and the one for Barrhead at the same time. MRS.

CRIPPS: We don't mind, I'm sure, Mr. Speaker.

528 ALBERTA HANSARD April 17, 1984 MR. KOWALSKI: I would be honoured. MRS. CRIPPS: I'm pleased to participate in this debate, Mr. Speaker. Certainly it's a given that 50 percent of the people in Alberta need an adequate voice in the decisions which affect them. I hope establishment of a Women's Secretariat effective April 1 will provide a focal point for identifying and assessing government policies, programs, and legislation which impact on women. It appears to me that the motion may be requesting the government to duplicate a function of the secretariat.

I'm not sure of this, because I'm not sure exactly what role the minister has designated for the secretariat. In reading the parameters governing the secretariat, it would seem to be doing the things this motion requests. I guess the question is how the broad range of women's issues would be translated to the secretariat. Would an advisory council be able to address the issues on a provincewide basis and then relay these to government through the secretariat? Or would they be going directly to the depart ment involved in the issues?

The secretariat should be the focal point for women's groups and organizations, for employee and employer groups, and for organizations in the public on issues affecting women. I guess I'd like to know how rural women would fit into this secretariat or advisory council. There are such groups as WIs, church women's groups, Lioness Clubs. Women of Unifarm, and the 60 other groups mentioned by the Member for Calgary McKnight in his opening remarks. Mr. Speaker, I represent a rural constituency where the question of women's issues is seldom raised as an issue in itself.

I guess I've tried to ascertain why it might be more a women's issue in an urban centre. I think the difference has to be in the makeup of the business, community, and family unit in rural Alberta. In rural Alberta and especially in the farming community, a wife is an integral part of the family business. Normally she's involved in the day-to-day business decisions. Butch told me he bought a new tractor yesterday and didn't ask his wife, but I'm sure she knew he was about to.

I know most of those kinds of business decisions — when to plant the wheat, whether you think a new tractor's a wise investment — are discussed. They're discussed over the break fast table or over coffee. In general the decisions are joint decisions. The fact is that unless there is a hired hand, few farms operate efficiently without the help and support of both partners. It used to annoy me when I went to Wetaskiwin or any of the major centres with the proposed intent of shopping.

By the time I'd picked up a piece for the baler at Massey-Ferguson, tractor points at the Cockshutt dealer, haybinder sections at the International dealer, and grease and oil, there was never time left . . . MR. FISCHER: Did you ask your husband? MRS. CRIPPS: No, he told me. There was never time left to do the shopping I'd started out to do. I often told him it would be far better if he'd use one line of machinery so I could do it all at one place. Most of the women in my community, neighbours, can run almost any farm machine as efficiently and effectively as the men.

We can't always fix it, we always get accused of breaking it, and we breathe a sigh of relief when it breaks when hubby's driving it. But the fact is that we run it. In the town of Drayton Valley where small businesses abound, I've noted that wives are totally involved in the operation of businesses. I guess the involvement of women can be illustrated by a comment made to me by an oil wife at a pancake breakfast not too long ago. It referred to the affect of the NEP on Alberta's oil industry.

We were sitting over coffee at breakfast and she said: if we ever get over this situation, I'll never cosign another note as long as I live. That statement makes one realize how involved women are in business, and how the insecurity and worry of business failure has affected each and every one of us over the past three years. Women are involved. This appears to be the norm for most small businesses and operations, espe cially the family type. I want to make the above distinction between rural and urban, because I understand the rural partnership of husband and wife teams.

The small-town nature of rural communities may make communication and co-operation easier between the sexes. I think the problems and concerns addressed by women would be universal in nature regardless of where they live. Women raise concerns about quality of education, health care, social issues, and quality of life. They have always been the backbone of community improvement and of volunteer organ izations. Traditionally women have been the anchor of the family unit. I want to highlight three issues, Mr. Speaker.

The first deals with the single parent and is the same whether the single parent is male or female. The problem may be different in nature; that is, if the father is a single parent, he may have a higher earning ability,

whereas a single mother may more easily cope with the family home life situation. Of course these two differences could be totally disputed. The fact is that single-parent families cause personal pressures and problems which would normally not result when two people share the burden of the responsibility of a family.

The problem, like many which would appear on the surface to be more directly related to women, is in fact a serious one for all of society: the children, the school — and we've heard a lot of comments recently about how the school life of a child is affected by the home atmosphere and pressures building there — and the community. Another issue I would like to raise is more directly related to women. Twice recently, I've had widows come to me for advice in a situation where I'm totally helpless. Both of these ladies had been left a widow without the spouse having made a will.

Probate of an estate in such cases is extremely com plicated and often takes years. It is difficult to imagine the magnitude of the problem unless one is in a public position where the problem is raised again and again. The needless anguish and torment I see people experiencing because of the lack of a will is the reason for my concern and for my raising that issue now. A priority educational program should be undertaken by women's groups and the government to highlight the difficulties the lack of a will creates for a family.

I'm absolutely sure any person being made aware of this would take the necessary step of making a will to safeguard the future of his loved ones and dependants. The last issue I'm particularly concerned about is the lack of pension plan opportunities for women. Most men age 65 or over, in fact 60 percent of them, live with a spouse. But only 34 percent of women over the age of 65 live with a spouse; 31 percent of these live alone. It means that a lot of senior citizens, women in particular, who live alone may have no pension funds to draw from.

Concerns and needs of women must be considered in the pension reform which is presently under review. First survivor benefits is a major area of pension reform. The recommendation is that married employees must opt for 50 percent joint and survivor pension in lieu of the normal form

April 17, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 529 of pension. This could only be waived by an agreement signed by both spouses. The provincial government and business com munity have both agreed that this is a good recommendation. It is also recommended that there should be a division of pension benefits upon marriage breakdown. A benefit should be split equally between the spouses, retain its character, and be locked in. These are of particular interest to women, because if the survivor benefit isn't carried over, if the pension benefit isn't split, it's the woman who is left totally without resources at pensionable age.

In the three-tier system we have — i.e. private pensions, public pensions, and individual savings — only one woman in five has the opportunity to pay into a private pension plan. With the exception of government pension plans, only 20 per cent of working women have access to pension plans. Eighty percent of our part-time labour force consists of women, and since women seem to be more highly mobile in the work force, it is imperative that consideration be given to ensuring that pension plan considerations include the special needs of women within the pension plan system.

Women who have never been in the work force need to be included in the Canada Pension Plan, and pensionable credit must be considered an asset. If I can go back to my earlier figures, where only 34 percent of the women over 65 live with a spouse, it is extremely impor tant to ensure that 50 percent of the population is not excluded from pension benefits upon reaching the age of 65. [interjection] It just means we're tougher than you are and we live longer. Pension plans must be universal, equitable, portable, and accessible to women.

I do want to mention the Alberta widows' pension, which would ensure that widows age 55 to 65 would receive $624 per month. This would entitle them to all the privileges and program benefits available to Alberta senior cit izens. It would also allow them entry into subsidized senior citizens' residential housing. With the establishment of the widows' pension, women over the age of 55 are generally more secure than many of their younger counterparts. There are many issues that are of particular concern to women. I know the government has to have a mechanism for these issues to be raised and reviewed.

I encourage any vehicle which will improve this communication, and help resolve prob lems and issues which directly affect 50 percent of the popu lation. Thank you. [Two members rose] MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Edmonton Norwood caught my eye first. MR. MARTIN: I was watching and got up quicker; I saw that. MR. SPEAKER: I was watching too, and I must say it wasn't even nearly a tie. MR. MARTIN: I promise I will be short. I would like to stay specifically to the motion, and I understand that the motion is very specific.

It urges the government to consider establishing an Alberta advi sory council on the status of women to advise the government on matters relating to women and to bring before the public [and I think that's a key point] and government, matters of interest and concern to women. Mr. Speaker, I think we all recognize today that there are myriad problems facing contemporary women; I don't need to go into it. We're all aware.

We can talk about equal pay for work of equal value, affirmative action, equality under the law, technology and its effect, the high unemployment specifically among women, and a very serious social problem — the bulk of poverty is among older women. Recently we also see more social problems affecting women, perhaps because they're more publicized. I expect that social problems are accentuated by the recession. I mean of course such things as prostitution, pornography, spouse battering, and sexual assault.

Recognizing that we are facing problems here that are huge and complex, the question I think we have to ask is: why do we need an advisory council? I would like to try to answer that in two ways. I believe it is a good resolution. I intend to support it. Mr. Speaker, there are two simple reasons why I believe we need an advisory council. It is not the be-all and end-all, and it's certainly not going to solve all the problems facing Alberta women today, but I sincerely believe it would at least be a start. There are two reasons.

First of all, if we are sitting in this Legislature and saying that women should be more involved in government, that the problems are serious — as I've heard other members talk about — then it seems to me we should go back to the people that we are talking about and suggest, how do they see the problem and how best to deal with it? Most organized women's groups that I know of in the province have asked precisely for an advisory council on the status of women. So it seems to me that's a simple answer: the people that are affected want it.

It makes a good deal of sense to me that we take this seriously and pass it. The second, as I understand it — we have, just recently, a secretariat. The hon. minister is here. In fairness to the minister, I suggest that that is certainly a step in the right direction. Many people might say, what is the difference? We already have a secretariat; why an advisory council? Why this motion? I think there are a couple of reasons besides it not satisfying many of the groups at least that I have talked to. Whether or not the minister means it this way, the secretariat is still a part of government.

As a result, because it is government and a government department — and I'm not questioning the min ister's motives — many people might question the independ ence of that organization. To me, that would probably be one of the main reasons why people would not accept the secretariat, because it is part of the government. I know the minister doesn't mean it that way. I believe him when I see him on television saying that he wants to move in many of the areas we've talked about. But I think that's a reality that many people are looking at. I know the minister is aware of that.

To me, the advantage of an advisory council is that it would be a much more independent body that would not be a part of government but would be made up of independent women from various groups right across the province. As a result of that, they could certainly not only be talking to government, which is part of this motion, but would also be very public. Mr.

Speaker, one of the things we all know in political life is that if we sit and are quiet and just deal with governments behind closed doors, whatever that government is, chances are they will not feel the political heat and will not move as quickly as they might to some types of legislation. When an advisory council is talking to the public, is well financed, and can get out and make their concerns public, more and more people are going to debate those issues and have an influence on members of the Legislature. Mr.

Speaker, for those two reasons — one, the fact that the organized women's groups themselves feel that this is the best way to go; and secondly, the fact that I believe a council could be more independent, at least in perception, and that's impor tant, and have more access to all sorts of publics rather than just the government — I would support this motion. I believe

530 ALBERTA HANSARD April 17, 1984 it's an important motion. One of my fears, as my colleague alluded to, is that we do not see where people stand. We know where a number of people who speak stand. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I am convinced of the merits of this motion. I am satisfied that the wide-ranging debate that has occurred across this province has been more than sufficient to allow the hon. members here to judge the motion fairly. To determine that this question will be decided without the impo sition of a possibly debilitating amendment. I move that the question now be put. MR.

SPEAKER: As hon. members are aware, the hon. Member for Edmonton Norwood has moved the previous question. It's a device or a procedural move which doesn't occur very fre quently. I think it may be the first time within recent memory in this Assembly. It has occurred about 27 times in the House of Commons in Ottawa since Confederation. I know of no reason why such a motion cannot be moved. Hon. members may wish to recall that the effect of such a motion is that the debate continues, but there may not be any amendment until the motion has been voted on.

If the motion is carried, that the previous question be now put, then of course that ends the matter and there must be a vote forthwith. If it is defeated, the motion is superseded for the time being, but it may be debated at a later time but not voted on the same day — not voted on today, for example, if it is today that the matter comes to a vote. MR. KOWALSKI: Mr. Speaker . . . MR. SPEAKER: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Member for Barrhead. It's not an amendment which curtails the debate. The debate is as wide-ranging as it was before the previous question was moved. MR. KOWALSKI: Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker. I take it that I can continue the debate unhindered. I always defer to the wise judgment of the gentleman in the Chair. On several earlier occasions this afternoon I attempted to get into the debate. I think this is an item, a motion, that certainly ranks among the most important that we have on the Order Paper of the Legislative Assembly this year. I want to begin by congratulating the Member for Calgary McKnight for the initiative he has taken in proposing this motion to the Assembly. The motion essentially asks us to consider establishing an advisory council on the status of women.

The council would advise the government on matters relating to women and would bring before the public and government matters of interest and concern to women. I enter this debate with some degree of trepidation, and I think it would be in order that I perhaps provide to all members of the Assembly my interest and experience in this issue. It goes back nearly a decade for it was about 10 years ago, in the year 1974, that I was employed as an executive assistant to the then deputy premier of the province of Alberta.

An invitation came to the office of the deputy premier, inviting my predecessor to participate as a keynote speaker in a major one- day seminar that was being held and was sponsored by the Status of Women Action Committee in the province of Alberta. Dr. Homer showed some degree of enthusiasm and interest in being in a position to participate as a guest speaker at this one- day convention. But he also asked me to take some time in putting together some notes for him and, in fact, writing a speech for him. That was one of the few occasions in the history of my predecessor that he ever had a written speech.

He also asked me to meet with the organizers of the group to make sure that we all understood completely what it was that the group wanted Dr. Homer to talk about and what the environment would be for that one-day seminar. I invited the persons who had extended the letter to Dr. Homer to meet with me, and we had a delightful conversation in the office on the west side of the third floor of this Legislature Building.

How ever, I was shocked at that time to be told by the persons — and I've used that expression twice now, quite deliberately, because I am in all sincerity and all honesty trying to convey a concern that I have with respect to the issue at hand. The persons who met with me told me that under no circumstances should Dr. Homer address the group as ladies.

I quite frankly fell out of my chair, and I said: I have great respect for my mother, I have great respect for my grandmother, and I have great respect for all the wonderful women I know in the world; I've always believed and I've always been taught that when you address a woman whom you admire and respect and call her a lady, in essence you are conveying the highest form of compliment that is possible and available. I was told that that wouldn't do; this was now an age in which you did not ster eotype people. I don't how you could stereotype a person by calling them a lady. Anyway, Mr.

Speaker, the gist of it all is that Dr. Homer attended the convention, the seminar, that was held in the city of Edmonton, and simply began. He didn't say "good after noon, ladies" or "good afternoon, persons" or anything. He simply began. Halfway through the speech he was giving, which was just an excellent speech — I still have a copy of it; it was one of my prouder moments — he was rather rudely interrupted by a person in the audience. That fazed his patience, I guess, and in an incredible moment of weakness he said: just a minute, my dear.

Of course the next day, in the major paper printed in the city of Edmonton, you had a great big headline in about four inches of black letters saying: My Dear!!! The gist of all that however, Mr. Speaker, was rather inter esting. Over the next six months, mail in our office on that issue was absolutely incredible, and it ran about 25 to I in favour of the message Dr. Homer presented at that seminar some 10 years ago. Remarkable as it was, most of the women in the province of Alberta seemed to be pleased by the reference that they should be referred to as a lady.

That taught me an incredible lesson in understanding politics in the environment we are in today. We've heard comments this afternoon about the need. The Member for Calgary McKnight, when he introduced his motion, waved his finger at some of us and said: you beware, because the political busi ness is there. The Leader of the Opposition, when he got up and used the time, spent his time basically lecturing on the need for the involvement in the political mechanism of certain people. I know the proud and determined women which all my colleagues have worked on this particular issue.

I'd just like members to know that in 1982, when I sought re-election, my whole campaign team was made up of women. They got me elected. They didn't have much to work with in terms of a candidate — and hon. members needn't agree with great enthusiasm on that issue — but it was an extremely important involvement for them. Unfortunately I had to go and ask each and every one of them to get involved. They did not step forward and say, we want to do it. In fact I had to convince each and every one of them to become involved. It was a feeling on their part that they shouldn't be involved.

But once having become involved, the machine they created will re-elect a Pro gressive Conservative candidate in the constituency of Barrhead next time. Mr. Speaker, I have a confusion. I said that I entered this debate this afternoon with a degree of trepidation When I look

April 17, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 531 at the motion that's being presented, we're asked to establish an Alberta advisory council. I look at the record of accom plishment, and I wonder if this advisory council will really come to the root of the issue. The issues, as I understand them, currently facing women in our society are multifold. Certainly the Member for Drayton Valley raised some of them. The Member for Edmonton Norwood raised a few others.

These issues of prostitution on the streets in the cities of Edmonton and Calgary, pornography, child violence and abuse, women in senior management positions not only in governments but in large-scale enterprises in our province, in the media industry — I'm not sure if it's a woman's role to be the news reader in a television station. I don't know how many women are involved in senior management positions in television stations. I don't know how many women write editorials for the major newspapers in our province. But certainly the challenges are there.

Perhaps those are the issues that have to be addressed, rather than simply the creation of another advisory council or another council or bureaucracy that deals with it. I look at the statements issued on February 28, 1984, by the Hon. Dick Johnston. He basically says that we now have created a mechanism in our province, a new structure, dealing with women's issues. We're talking about new committees. The Women's Secretariat is now going to be established within Executive Council.

The secretariat, which the existing Alberta Women's Bureau will become a part of, is supposed to provide a focal point for identifying and assessing government policies, programs, and legislation which impact on women. The Mem ber for Edmonton Belmont talked about a number of other initiatives with respect to that. We also made a commitment in February 1984 to set up a cabinet committee on women's issues, and we now have an interdepartmental committee on women's issues currently looking at a variety of them. But the issues and looking at the issues are one thing.

The attack on some of the concerns is quite another thing. I think we have to spend more time, energy, and effort in attacking the problems, rather than simply setting up another council, another body, another institution, that is going to bring to the attention of everybody what some of the commonplace issues are. I'm troubled as to how I can vote in favour of the motion. On the one hand, it would simply create another bureaucracy which, in my view, may very well lead to nothing more than simply a delay in dealing with some of the issues.

On the other hand, if I do not vote in favour of the motion, that's like voting against motherhood. It's a dilemma. I don't know if it's shared by any of my hon. colleagues in this House, but I think it's one that has to be put on the record in terms of the involvement I've had on this matter from a number of perspectives. I might add, Mr. Speaker, that I've shared this dilemma with the executive of my constituency association, which is made up of some 60 people, a majority of whom are very, very active women.

Granted they live in rural Alberta, and perhaps the perspective put forward by the Member for Drayton Valley is one that applies only to the residents of rural Alberta. They have a difficult time looking at additional studies dealing with their concerns and problems. They have become very active as leaders in the community by getting involved and elected as mayors of villages or towns, taking an active role as school board representatives, or becoming the presidents of God knows how many different committees and agricultural societies, boards, and agencies that we have in our constituency.

Some 20 people from this constituency, half of whom were women, attended a recent political convention. They did not come as spouses. Their husbands were not the delegates; they were the delegates. They have gotten involved and have made a com mitment for the improvement of society. They tell me that we don't really need another council to deal with their issues. What they want is some active action, and the most active action they can have is by simply getting involved. I don't say by the troublesome concern of getting involved in a dramatic way. I use the word "simply" getting involved.

It's standing up and saying, I want to become a part of it. Mr. Speaker, there's one other comment I would like to make. In the Legislature of the province of Alberta, and in the history of this esteemed Legislature going back to 1905, there have been 19 women who have fought the hard battle to get elected to this Legislature. Today there are six in this Assembly. I know of no other Legislature in the country of Canada that has as many women as are currently sitting in the Legislative Assembly in the province of Alberta. When you look at the six of them — the Hon. Mary LeMessurier, Minister of Culture; the Hon.

Connie Osterman, Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs; Mrs. Sheila Embury, Member for Calgary North West but also the Whip of the government caucus; Mrs. Myrna Fyfe from St. Albert, chairman of our education caucus committee, education being one of the most important items we currently have before this government during this term of office, the highest profile item we have in the business before the Assembly, a matter and an item that affects every man, woman, and child in this province; Mrs.

Janet Koper from Calgary Foothills, chairperson of our caucus committee on social affairs, and you look at the leg islation we have before the Assembly dealing with Bill 105, the Child Welfare Act, the Public Health Act that Mrs. Koper introduced just a few days ago, and others; the very effervescent and dynamic lady from Drayton Valley, Mrs.

Shirley Cripps, the chairperson of our utilities and telecommunications com mittee who has been actively participating with leaders and shakers throughout all this province in a pretty dramatic way — their roles should not be minimized and should not be mis understood by anyone who would gainfully attempt to play politics with respect to them. They are indeed extremely impor tant leaders in our society. They have done it by getting involved, and they have done it by fighting their way into this Assembly.

I asked one of them earlier today to give me one phrase that perhaps best sums up their role in our Assembly and in our political way of life. I'm going to give you the phrase, Mr. Speaker, and then I'm going to identify the source of the phrase. I asked her the question: what one line best summarizes the women in our caucus, the women in our government? Let it not go unnoticed that the only caucus in this Assembly that has women in it is the Progressive Conservative caucus. The one phrase — and I repeat the question again.

I said, what phrase best describes the role of the six women in the caucus of the Progressive Conservative Party? Her response was "direct, straightforward, pushy as hell, and designed to win". That I attribute to Mrs. Cripps of Drayton Valley. Those are her own words, but she is dead right. Mr. Speaker, I'm supportive of the motion. I will vote in favour of the motion. But I really wonder if I'm voting because this is the right thing that we need today in the province of Alberta to deal with women's issues, or am I doing it simply because it's the motherhood approach to do?

If that's the case, that's simply tokenism, and that's worse than any of the crit icisms that have ever been made in the past about chauvinistic males. Thank you. MR. ALGER: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure to join in the debate on Motion 209, proposed by the hon. Member for

532 ALBERTA HANSARD April 17, 1984 Calgary McKnight. I have a real confession for you: I'm of mixed emotions as to how to get this particular speech started. You see, in reality, I've been around a long time, and women have played a big

part in my life, particularly my own woman — my wife, Norma — who has been married to me for almost 40 years. Without her maybe I could have been a millionaire; on the other hand, without her I may not have been as well off as I am. It's hard to tell, and this is why I'm having difficulty getting this going. You see, I'm in several businesses. One of my handicaps is slow horses, and the other one is fast women. I've had a difficult time with both. However, I want you to know I'm on the women's side, before I get carried into this any deeper.

This motion urges the government to consider establishing an advisory council on the status of women. The council would advise the government on matters related to women and would bring before the public and the government matters of interest and concern to women. Apparently this issue has been an ongo ing concern of this Assembly for some time. As a matter of fact, it's almost historic. I think it's reasonable to assume that some fundamental principles be ensured before we pass a motion of this magnitude.

As is the case of the Member for Barrhead, he knows it's the right thing to do, but he's not sure it's the necessary thing to do. In fact he thinks that if women become more entangled with our political structure, probably they could get by without having this particular motion. First and foremost, we've got to be sure that if we decide to establish an advisory council on the status of women, its parameters do not overlap that of the already established Wom en's Secretariat. The secretariat was recently established under the watchful eye of the hon. Minister of Advanced Education.

The Women's Secretariat provides a focal point for identifying and assessing government policies, programs, and legislation which impact on women. The major functions of the secretariat are to provide co-ordination between government departments, to ensure that women's concerns are reflected in policy and program development. It also analyzes and reviews any Alberta legislation that has a particular impact on women, as well as advises the minister responsible for the status of women and other government departments on matters related to women.

Finally, it provides a communication link between community and government, public and private sectors. As you can see, its range and scope is pretty large and encompasses a lot of territory. The question remains, what could an Alberta advisory coun cil on the status of women actually do for women in Alberta? I suppose the first function of the council would be the creation of another alternative for women of this province to approach the Legislature with their problems and concerns. Much has been said by the members of the press that this Assembly does little and cares less for women's issues in Alberta.

Personally I think that's hogwash. We have created the Women's Sec retariat; we have recently discussed in this Assembly matters such as spouse battering, equal pay for equal work, and the creation of a task force to examine the role of women in Alberta, and introduced the women's pension Act. Although these in no way represent all the concerns of women in this province, they are a starting point this government will do its utmost to improve upon. So far, from the speakers who have spoken to this motion ahead of me, I'd have to guess that improving upon it is exactly what they're endeavouring to do.

Another advantage of the Alberta council is that it would be entrenched by legislation, thus ensuring a more permanent status. Any changes made would be through the Legislature. This concept of a permanent fixture would hopefully appease all those who are worried that our concern for women's issues is just a passing fad, which of course is not the case. I conclude, Mr. Speaker, by thanking the hon. Member for Calgary McKnight for advancing this motion. The fundamental principles behind it are important and require a great deal of time and attention to give justice to the proposal. Thank you for your time. MR.

PAPROSKl: Mr. Speaker, I also am pleased to get involved in Motion No. 209, that the Assembly urge the government to consider establishing an Alberta advisory coun cil on the status of women. On November 16, 1983, when a similar motion was put forth by the hon. Member for Calgary McKnight, I spoke in favour of this motion and began to list my reasons when debate was adjourned. I applaud the member for returning this motion today for debate.

But like members before me, much has transpired since November 1983 regarding how this government would like to deal with the myriad of women's issues, and it is a dilemma for me. The Minister of Advanced Education, responsible for wom en's issues, has initiated the development of an exciting pro gram, the establishment of a Women's Secretarial, a secretariat many women now believe will lead to the prevention of many of their concerns and, secondly, will meet head on a multitude of concerns women face today and into the future. I therefore have ambivalent feelings indeed, Mr.

Speaker, regarding this motion being debated today. I know the Member for Calgary McKnight used the advisory council concept as a move that is still required. However, I believe that the secretariat concept proposed by the Minister of Advanced Education should be given a time period to operate and deal with some of the wom en's concerns. Mr. Speaker, last November I began to discuss reasons w

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19840417
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L20 S2 19840417 1430 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	1946ab764c6f4d1ddc343d5b85bc979042071928

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