November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1989 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Thursday, November 15, 2007 1:00 p.m. Date: 07/11/15 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Let us pray. Author of all wisdom, knowledge, and understand- ing, we ask for guidance in order that truth and justice may prevail in all of our judgments. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Member for Battle River-Wainwright. Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure today to rise to introduce to you and through you to members of the House 25 guests from Hughenden, comprised of students, teachers, and parents. I had the pleasure a couple of weeks ago of being in that school and talking to the students about the role of an MLA. We do a little mock Legislature, and I was proud to say that those students were some of the brightest students I have ever experienced talking to. They are a brilliant young group that knows more about this Legislature than most Albertans do in general.

They are accompa- nied today by their incredible teacher, who teaches them a lot about government, especially in Alberta, Mrs. Cathy Samson, by Mrs. Kym Poelzer, Mrs. Carol Anholt, Mrs. Brenda Buchanan-Charlton, Mr. Eric Poelzer, Ms Yvonne Waring, and Mr. Matt Samson. I’d ask that they all rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. Mr. Stelmach: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my pleasure to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a strong member of the community for the Strathcona riding, Mr. Dave Quest.

Dave is the nominated candidate for the Progressive Conservative Association and brings with him a wealth of knowledge and experience. He served in various positions with the party, as executive of the Better Business Bureau of Alberta, and is a very dedicated member of his community on many levels, including coaching soccer. I’m certainly proud to have Dave as a member of my team as we build Alberta’s future. Dave is joined by his wife, Fiona, and I would ask that they both rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. Mr.

Speaker, once again it’s my pleasure to rise and introduce to you and through you to all Members of the Legislative Assembly the nominated candidate for the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta for the riding of Edmonton-Manning, Mr. Peter Sandhu. Mr. Sandhu succeeded in his nomination after the second ballot of a very strongly contested nomination. Peter is a centennial ambassa- dor, helping to celebrate Alberta’s 100th birthday, a very dedicated member of his community, and a strong booster of not only the city of Edmonton but the province and the country of Canada.

I’m proud to have Peter as a member of my team as we build Alberta’s future. Peter is joined by his wife, Kamaljit, and I would ask that both of them rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Rev. Abbott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my great pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to all members of this House 32 of Alberta’s brightest and best students from Warburg school in my constituency. Warburg school is known as the small school with a big heart. They are accompanied today by their teacher, Mrs.

Chandra Klatt, by parent helpers Mrs. Cheryl Garrett, Ms Lynn Lafreniere, Mrs. Tara Benoit, and Mrs. Nicole Moeller. I would ask them all to please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly 18 grade 6 students and their teacher, Nova Gould. They are from Kameyosek elementary school in Mill Woods, and they are excited to be here. I’d like to have them stand, please, and receive the warm traditional welcome of the Assembly.

The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Marz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to the members of the Assembly 18 students from the Faculty of Law at the University of Alberta who enrolled in a course in legislative process and legislative drafting taught by our Senior Parliamentary Counsel Rob Reynolds and Chief Legislative Counsel for the government, Peter Pagano. They’re seated in the members’ gallery, and I would ask that they rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I believe I have two introductions today. The first person I’d like to introduce is Bonita Davidson. She is a constituent of Edmonton-Centre. She has been a dedicated personal care attendant for 25 years. She believes strongly that caregivers are not treated or paid fairly and that quality of care is suffering because of this. She also has collected thousands of signatures on the petitions that I’ve been tabling every day in the Assembly. Bonita, if you’re here, I would ask you to please rise and accept the welcome of the Assembly.

The second introduction that I’d like to make to you, Mr. Speaker, and through you to all members of the Assembly is Nick Palamar- chuk. Nick is a senior in my constituency of Edmonton-Centre and a resident of Cathedral Close. I met him during one of my frequent visits to Cathedral Close. He came to the Legislature today, actually, to watch the debate of Bill 46, which I gather will be a very short debate today. He’s a lifelong student and is currently working on his master’s degree. So there we have it: lifelong learning in the flesh. Please join me in welcoming Nick Palamarchuk.

The Speaker: The Associate Minister for Capital Planning. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to introduce some constituents who are accompanying Mr. Peter Sandhu today for their first visit to the Legislature. I’d like to ask Kulwinder Toor, Inderjit Gill, Harpreet Sandhu, and Heiko Lotzgeselle to please stand. Please welcome these wonderful members from my area. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. leader of the third party. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m honoured

Alberta Hansard November 15, 20071990 today to introduce to you and through you to this Assembly two long-time NDP activists, Laurie and Christine Lang. Laurie was one of the founding members of the Knights of Columbus 12457 here in Edmonton. He’s been active in his church, St. Dominic Savio parish. Laurie has been employed at Alberta Hospital and was president of his local and the United Nurses of Alberta. In 2004 Laurie was our candidate in Edmonton-Manning and ran a great campaign.

He returned to politics, only this time on the federal scene, to run for the NDP in the riding of Edmonton-Sherwood Park in the 2006 election. I want to thank him for his contribution to the NDP and to democracy in Alberta. Christine Lang is an active volunteer in her community. She teaches at Landing Trail school in Sturgeon county. She and Laurie have two sons, Ian and Keith. Ian and his wife, Dina, live in Beaumaris. Keith is married to Mandy, and they have two sons, Nicholas and Matthew. Before I ask them to accept the warm welcome of the Assembly, I would like to thank the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Manning for helping to facilitate and organize this visit today. I would now ask that Laurie and Christine rise or wave and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise this afternoon and introduce to you and through you to all Members of this Legislative Assembly a resident of Rimbey, Joe Anglin. Joe is a father of three, and he is a very active citizen in the affairs of not only this province but also in central Alberta.

Joe is one of the many citizens who are actively fighting Bill 46. He is an articulate, reasoned voice in why Bill 46 should not become law in its present form. I would now ask Joe, who is sitting in the public gallery, to please rise and receive the warm traditional welcome of this Assembly. 1:10 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my great pleasure and honour to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly today two gentlemen. Father Bernie Gilliece and Nels Rissling are here in support of Laurie and Chris Lang today.

Father Bernie is a respected educator and a Salesian priest and was a principal as well for many years. He is the very much respected and loved priest of St. Dominic’s parish in Edmonton-Manning. Nels Rissling, Mr. Speaker, is also a great contributor to the community, both as an active member in the Kilkenny Community League, his church, and local 488 of the plumbers and pipefitters, and was a former candidate for the New Democrats for Parliament in 1988. I ask that they rise and accept the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. head: Ministerial Statements The Speaker: The hon. the Premier.

House of Commons Seating Formula Mr. Stelmach: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday in Ottawa the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper reintroduced in the House of Commons the Constitution Act, 2007. The act deals with the imbalance in representation in the federal Parliament as a result of growing populations across Canada, especially those in Alberta and British Columbia. Under the new formula proposed in this legislation, Alberta will get an additional five members in the House of Commons.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that the Prime Minister from Alberta has the foresight and the political will to deal with this long- standing issue. On behalf of all Albertans I want to congratulate the Prime Minister and his government for taking this historic action, which will come into effect after the next federal census, in 2011. As I have said many times before, as the engine of Canadian prosperity and economic growth Alberta does deserve a bigger voice in national affairs, and now thanks to the actions of the government, led by a proud Calgarian, we’re seeing that happen again.

The Prime Minister is taking action to improve and, of course, modernize democracy in the House of Commons and the Senate. Now, these are all long-standing goals of the province of Alberta. The Prime Minister should know that this government and this province strongly support his actions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition to participate. Dr. Taft: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate this opportu- nity to respond to the Premier. Alberta Liberals agree that additional representation for Alberta in the House of Commons is a good thing. We welcome the change.

As Alberta’s population grows, so too should our influence and our presence within Confederation. It’s equally important to ensure that Albertans are fairly represented at the provincial level here in the Legislature. Currently, urban areas are underrepresented in this House compared to rural areas, which have only a third of the province’s population but half of the seats. Edmonton in particular has been shortchanged. Seats should be redistributed to make sure that our cities have a voice in this Chamber that’s truly representative of their proportion of the population.

As the federal government pursues electoral reform, so too should we here in Alberta. Redistribution would help renew democracy in Alberta, but it’s just a beginning. For example, we should consider fixed election dates, a citizens’ assembly to discuss proportional representation, and whistle-blower protection: policies the Alberta Liberals have long supported. This news from Ottawa should serve as an example for democratic renewal here at home. Let’s see what we can do to make Alberta a more vibrant, robust, and representative democracy. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr.

Martin: Yes. I’d like unanimous consent for the leader of the NDP to reply to the ministerial announcement. The Speaker: Hon. members, under our traditions and rules unanimous consent will be asked for by the chair and must be provided in order to recognize the leader of the third party. I’ll only ask one question: is anyone opposed? [Unanimous consent granted] The Speaker: The hon. leader of the third party. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the Assem- bly as well. Alberta’s NDP fully supports the move by the federal government to increase the number of seats for Alberta.

I think it’s a matter of common sense that in a province with a rapidly growing

November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1991 population, its representation needs to be in proportion to its population. I’m also very pleased to say that it looks like Prime Minister Harper is taking the advice of the federal NDP leader, Mr. Jack Layton, and is considering a referendum on the abolition of the Senate in Canada, something that we have long supported. Thank you. The Speaker: Hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning, you’re wishing to participate as well? Mr. Backs: I’m wishing to seek unanimous consent. The Speaker: Hon. members, again unanimous consent will be required, so I’ll only ask one question.

Is anyone opposed to providing an opportunity for the hon. Member for Edmonton- Manning to participate? An Hon. Member: No. The Speaker: I think that said no, so I’ll accept that as not opposed. [Unanimous consent granted] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank all members of this Assembly for an opportunity to speak on what is an extremely important development in the history of our province and the history of our country.

The importance of Alberta getting more seats gives more voice to our province, to our Alberta, and to the west in the Parliament of Canada, and we need that there. We need that there probably even more so in a reformed Senate or if we should get rid of it. You know, triple-E is something we should be pushing for, that we should see, and that we must have in our Parliament. Alberta’s importance is increasing. I thank the Prime Minister for doing this, and I support him. I’m sure that, indeed, all Albertans do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Drumheller-Stettler.

Amber Alert Mr. Hayden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday Alberta’s most precious and valuable resource was put at risk. The resource that I’m talking about is our children. First of all, I want to say that the child that was abducted in my constituency is safely back at home with his family. Secondly, I want to publicly thank the young people in his community for their quick thinking and their accurate information that helped police and the public to recover this brave young man so quickly.

The co-operation between the public and the RCMP through the Amber Alert program has shown that if you put our children at risk, the police services and the people of Alberta will come together very quickly to stop you. While I’m not sure what role the Amber Alert played in this particular case, I want to thank the police officers involved, and I want to thank all my colleagues for putting the Amber Alert program in place and all Albertans for responding when we are in a time of need. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East.

Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to talk about AISH, the assured income for the severely handicapped, a group of approximately 36,000 Albertans who live on the edge of poverty and can do nothing about it. Many have mental health diseases, related mental problems, may be brain injured, or are physically disabled. Many are severely undereducated. Many were cared for in institu- tions and are now living in the community and struggling just to exist. Affordable housing is a challenge.

Some live in subsidized housing, but for many shelter takes up to 70 to 80 per cent of their income. There have been subtle changes to the eligibility criteria, evaluat- ing disabilities in terms of activities of daily living despite the fact that there is no reference either in the act or the regulations. Many applications require appeals.

This is a great hardship for this group of people. 1:20 There have been additional improvements to the AISH program – an increase in employment income exemptions and easier reporting – but there have been only three raises in benefits since 1993, still not enough to live with dignity. The simple truth is that AISH benefits have not kept up with the rate of inflation. It needs to be increased and then indexed annually, as are MLA salaries. Cost-of-living increases affect all Albertans, not just MLAs. Remember the purpose of the AISH benefit.

It is meant to provide financial support to Albertans with disabilities who are severely and permanently limited in their ability to earn a living. It is to eliminate barriers to full participation in society and increase independence. I challenge every member in this Legislature to think how they would survive with dignity on $1,050 a month while watching inflation eat every last penny. A society may be judged on how it treats its most disadvantaged, and so should a government. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lesser Slave Lake. Métis Week Ms Calahasen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

November 16 always evokes sad yet joyous memories for me. It was on this date 122 years ago that Louis Riel was hung for treason because he fought for Métis rights. Many Métis people feel that Métis are still struggling to take their rightful place in Canadian society. Some provinces in Canada even today refuse to accept and implement these rights as recognized and affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada. The Métis have had to use the judicial system to prove that their rights exist, and thanks to the Supreme Court of Canada time and again the courts have sided with the Métis. Alberta has done better.

We have had a positive and productive relationship with Métis that dates back to the 1920s. As an example, Alberta is the only province to provide a land base and recognize a governance system in legislation for Métis settlements. As well, we have had agreements with the Métis Nation of Alberta to ensure that Métis can be self-sufficient. In the area of child welfare the government of Alberta established a separate region for Métis in order to ensure protection and care of Métis children and families, the first of its kind.

We believe Métis people are part of Alberta’s rich past and an important part of our future, and that’s why Métis Week, November 11 to 17 of this year, is to be celebrated by all people and communi- ties. On November 12 the Minister of International, Intergovernmental

Alberta Hansard November 15, 20071992 and Aboriginal Relations along with the Métis Nation association president, Audrey Poitras, helped launch Edmonton’s Métis Week celebration with a special flag-raising ceremony at city hall. In addition, on November 16 at 11 a.m. here in the Legislature there will be a special ceremony commemorating Louis Riel. Communities across Alberta will be celebrating Métis Week. Come join us as we reflect on past challenges and successes and in building a strong Métis community. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose. National Philanthropy Day Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. For the last 22 years one day of the year has been designated as National Philanthropy Day. This special day helps to recognize and pay tribute to the people and organizations that help to make our communities a better place through their generosity and charitable giving. Whether it’s $10 a month or $100 a month, Albertans recognize the importance of charitable giving. In fact, a recent Statistics Canada study found that Albertans gave $177 million more last year in tax-deductible charitable donations than they did in 2005.

This is an increase of 15.5 per cent and is the largest increase of any province in Canada. Clearly, we can see that many Albertans are willing to help those in need, whether it is with an in-kind gift or a financial donation. National Philanthropy Day is also the perfect time to remind Albertans about the enhanced charitable tax credit that was intro- duced as part of Budget 2007. Alberta’s charitable tax credit increased more than 60 per cent for total annual charitable donations over $200.

When combined with the federal credit, Albertans will now receive a 50-cent tax credit for every dollar donated over the $200 threshold. With this increase Alberta has one of the highest charitable tax credits in Canada. One of our government’s top priorities is to improve the quality of life for all Albertans. The enhanced charitable tax credit is one way we are addressing this priority. National Philanthropy Day may only be one day of the year, but there are 364 other days where Albertans show their generosity and giving spirit. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Laurie Lang Mr.

Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Many great people in our communities are often unsung heroes. They make a tremendous contribution to all but never ask for anything in return. Laurie Lang is such a contributor and is with us here in the Legislature today. Laurie is a community and social activist, a leader in his church, his union, and has been an active voice in municipal, provincial, and federal politics. Devoted to his family, Laurie is husband to Chris, father to Keith and Ian, father-in-law to Mandy and Dina, and grandfather to Nicholas and Matthew. Another grandchild is expected in not too many months.

Laurie was born in Killam, Alberta, and was raised in Spring Lake. During his time as a grain elevator manager in Trochu he was an active volunteer firefighter and continued that at the Alberta Hospital department in Alberta. Starting at Alberta Hospital in 1971, Laurie has worked there most of his career as both a registered psychiatric nurse and a registered nurse. Laurie also served on his profession’s council. Laurie was a director of the board of Alberta Hospital, chaired the Alberta Hospital foundation, and helped found the AUPE local there. He was the president of local 183 of the United Nurses of Alberta.

Laurie ran four times as a New Democrat, twice federally in northeast Edmonton and twice in Edmonton- Manning. He is a strong advocate for a better mental health system. He knows that Alberta needs more trained mental health personnel, especially in children’s and community health. Laurie, to me, is known best through St. Dominic Savio parish and with his wife is active in many c hurch functions. Laurie is also a brother knight, a fourth degree, and indeed the founding grand knight of St. Dominic Savio Knights of Columbus Council 12457.

He is among the many knights who make many quiet contributions to so many communities. Laurie Lang is highly respected. He is presently in a difficult battle with cancer, and we pray that your recovery will be quick. We all wish you and your family well, Laurie. Another statement for Laurie will soon be made in our Canadian Parliament by the Member for Edmonton-Sherwood Park, Ken Epp. I salute you, Laurie Lang. You’re one of those uncele- brated heros that make our Alberta a better place. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Labour Relations Mr.

Martin: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to make a few comments today about lack of fairness in our labour laws in this province. The minister is aware that I’ve had correspondence with her asking that we take a look at the labour laws. I notice that the minister said in the letter, “The Alberta government periodically reviews its labour laws to ensure they are relevant to the needs of Albertans.” Well, I’d like to see those periodic reviews because the last time we really had labour laws looked at in a major way was 1988. Unfortunately, for workers it made it worse than it was before.

But I think there are some issues that cry out. The building trades have their problems, as the minister alludes to, and some of that’s in court, and we’ll have to see how that works through. There are a couple of things that we could do that we should have learned right away, and one is first contract arbitration. We’ve had some very harsh strikes that lasted a lot longer than they needed to. Other provinces bring in first contract arbitration, and it’s settled, and the union is there to represent the workers. We saw what happened in Tyson recently. We saw the Pal ace Casino workers being out for over 300 days.

These went on far too long. The previous minister said that they would look at first contract arbitra- tion. Mr. Speaker, I would remind this minister that we should be taking a look at these things. Five years down the way is not good enough. There has to be more fairness in our labour legislation. While we’re at it, we could look at replacement workers. That also leads to danger. Surely it’s tim e for this government to bring fairness into our labour laws. Thank you. head: Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees The Speaker: The hon. Member for Bonnyville-Cold Lake. Mr. Ducharme: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. As chair of the Standing Committee on Resources and Environment it is my pleasure to table the required number of copies of the committee’s final report on the beverage container recycling review. The committee chose to undertake this project after r eceiving a request in July from the Minister of Environment. This report is the result of nine committee meetings, which included public hearings in both Edmonton and

November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1993 Calgary and the review of over 115 public submissions. The committee also received administrative, research, and procedural support from the staff at the Legislative Assembly Office, including Mr. Robert Reynolds, QC, Senior Parliamentary Counsel; Dr. Philip Massolin and his committee research team; Ms Rhonda Sorensen and the communications staff; the Hansard staff; and committee clerks Karen Sawchuk and Jody Rempel.

I would also like to acknowledge the valuable support from the staff at Alberta Environment and the contributions from members on both sides of the House for this project. head: 1:30 Oral Question Period The Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Royalty Revenues Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first question is to the Premier. On November 7 the Premier claimed that he was never made aware during his years in cabinet that Department of Energy reports were recommending Alberta’s royalties be increased.

I make the next quote very carefully, and I’ll table the documents. It’s from a news story. The Premier told the Canadian press, and I quote: in the time that I was around the cabinet table, there was nothing coming to me. End quote. My question to the Premier. Does the Premier stand by this claim? The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the media was asking if I received any information with respect to royalty information or whether anyone presented anything to cabinet. I said that I resigned from cabinet in March of 2005 . . . Mr. MacDonald: In 2006. The Speaker: Avoid these outbursts. Mr.

Stelmach: Well, at least he’s listening. . . . 2006 to pursue the leadership. I did that, and during that long campaign period I heard very clearly from Albertans that they had some questions with respect to th e royalty regime, with respect to some of the, you know, penny on the dollar that came up with respect to the oil sands. I promised that I would undertake the review. We did. We now have the framework in place. The issue has been settled and is done with. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you. My next question is to the Minister of Energy.

Yesterday when asked in this Assembly to make public all the internal documents on royalties itemized by the Auditor General, the minister replied that those documents need to be protected because of “legislative protection with respect to some information that’s provided to the cabinet.” Does the minister stand by this claim that the documents itemized by the Auditor General were provided to cabinet? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, very clearly we’re back into some more of living in the past. We’re talking about royalty reviews.

By the way, the Auditor General’s report states on page 100: “We could not find an authoritative definition of ‘royalty review’. Not surprisingly, the term means different things to different people.” Where was the royalty review? The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Complete evasion. Anyway, the government cannot have it both ways. It can’t deny Albertans access to these documents because they were provided to cabinet and then turn around and claim that cabinet never saw them. The Premier needs to get his story straight. To the Premier.

The Premier needs to clarify which of this government’s stories are true. Were the documents shared with cabinet as the Minister of Energy has claimed, or were they not as the Premier himself has claimed? The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, once again, we took a very, very bold leadership move to review the royalty framework of the province of Alberta. It came as a result of listening to Albertans. The decision has been made. The member wants to live sometimes in the past.

During this period of time, in the last number of years that he served as Leader of the Official Opposition, he still has not taken a public position on the royalty framework. He’s still sitting on the fence. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is just too much fun. Yesterday the Minister of Energy claimed: “What I can tell you is that from 2000 to 2007 there weren’t so many missing billions.” I want to just repeat that.

The Minister of Energy said: “What I can tell you is that from 2000 to 2007 there weren’t so many missing billions.” I want to ask his boss how many. To the Premier: just how many missing billions were there? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, at least $22 billion worth of missing debt. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday the Minister of Energy also claimed, and I’ll quote him again just to be right: “I’ll tell you some facts: $15 billion in royalty revenue to the province of Alberta, ’03-04.” Now, according to the government’s latest annual report – and it is only an annual report, Mr. Speaker – audited by the Auditor General, it was in fact only $7.6 billion, including not only royalties but bonuses and sales, rentals and fees, and all the rest. To the Premier: can the Premier explain why his Minister of Energy is claiming they took in $15 billion in royalties when the true number is only half that amount? Mr.

Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I’ll refer it back to the Minister of Energy. He can reply to the question or whatever is coming from the opposition. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Clearly, again, what we have here is more innuendo, more backtracking, more backpedalling, trying to get away from a situation they found themselves in yesterday where, in fact, the line of questioning was found to be a bit inappropriate.

Alberta Hansard November 15, 20071994 With respect to the numbers we should just do the math. The Liberal math doesn’t add up. If you add up ’03 and ’04, the numbers will support themselves. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let’s recount some of the facts: deciding to let billions go uncollected year after year and then covering that fact up year after year. Now, in trying to defend the government’s record on this file, the Minister of Energy is telling Albertans that they collected $15 billion when they collected only half that amount. Albertans need a government they can trust.

To the Premier. Will the Premier do the right thing: put the public interest ahead of personal loyalty and replace this Energy minister with a minister who’s capable of cleaning up this mess and taking charge of this file? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I have tremendous confidence in my Minister of Energy. Not very often am I going to di g this low in this Legislative Assembly, but this person across the way made very serious allegations last spring with respect to a water issue.

He said he had documents – he never did table them until today – at the same accusing me of receiving money through the Beaver regional waste management commission, and he’d sent a letter to them two years in a row to receive money. You’re talking about trust. I’m clean. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for St. Albert. Deferred School Infrastructure Maintenance Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last week the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation consulted boards . . . [interjec- tions] Excuse me.

The Infrastructure and Transportation minister consulted school boards about the deferred maintenance problem. The next day the Minister of E ducation blamed the problem on 30 years of wear and tear. The maintenance backlog is $700 million in Calgary alone, an indication to you, Mr. Speaker, of the systemic underfunding not working. To the President of the Treasury Board: given the comments by the Education minister, why has the government therefore failed to address the maintenance needs of school boards for so many decades across the province? Mr. Snelgrove: Mr.

Speaker, one of the first things this Premier did is to bring forward a policy on how we will handle our unfunded allocated surpluses. On top of the hundreds of millions that we spend annually on maintenance, he’s going to put two-thirds of our unallocated surpluses to capital maintenance. What more responsi- ble way for Albertans’ money is that? The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Flaherty: Mr. Speaker, thank you. We have $700 million in Calgary. The government has certainly demonstrated through its actions how sincerely it takes this situation.

A below-inflation increase in the budget has left school boards desperate. An Alberta Liberal government, on the other hand, would ensure sufficient, predictable funds for schools across the province. To the President of the Treasury Board: why is this government relying on unsustain- able, surprise funding, luck-of-the-draw funding which doesn’t work? Why are they relying on this? Tell us about that, Mr. President. 1:40 Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, I’m surprised at the tone of someone who should know better about the education system in Alberta and the funding that it does.

We f und the best education system in Canada, probably in North America. Our students achieve among the highest results, and we have an absolutely unmatched building program. But it’s not just in Calgary, sir. It’s all over Alberta where we build schools. We deal with the whole province. We don’t try and separate one city from another. We look at the total education funding. Mr. Flaherty: Well, let’s go across the floor to somewhere else so we can get a better answer.

When Alberta’s provincial government told school boards that no additional funds would be allocated to education, they were instructed to get very creative. Two school boards came up with an idea to hold a plebiscite about possibly raising taxes to come up with the shortfall of monies. An Hon. Member: And what happened? Mr. Flaherty: Well, I’ll tell you. Just be patient. Be patient. This notion was overwhelmingly shot down by the public. They rightly see education to be the responsibility of this government.

To the Minister of Education: given that this government has shirked its responsibility, are they now suggesting these creative approaches that the minister suggested for raising funds . . . The Speaker: The hon. minister. [interjection] The hon. minister has been recognized . . . [interjection] . . . for the third time. Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, I suggest that the hon. Leader of the Opposition might want to look at a new caucus whip because he’s got somebody there who managed to control the out-of- control members behind him.

The hon. member is correct that there is a provision in the School Act that if a school board so chooses, it can have a plebiscite at the same time as school board elections. In these past elections on, I guess, the 15th of October there were two plebiscites held in Alberta. As the hon. member correctly pointed out, neither one of them was successful, but that’s the democratic process at work. The Speaker: The hon. leader of the third party. Taser Use by Law Enforcement Personnel Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The terrible incident which took place at the Vancouver International Airport on October 14 raises serious concerns about the safety and use of tasers by law enforcement personnel. I saw that last night. I saw the tape. I was really shocked. Within 30 seconds – this man was moving away from the police. He was retreating from them, he was tasered, and he died. The question is not limited to what happens in B.C. On August 10 Jason Doan of Red Deer died after being tasered three times, and on Christmas Eve a year ago Alessandro Fiacco died after being tasered in Edmonton. My question is to the Premier.

In light of this continuing pattern of tragic losses . . . The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. [interjection] The hon. the Premier. Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the Justice minister has indicated that he’s willing to look at a review of the use of tasers, but in this particular case he was supporting the very catastrophic event that we witnessed, of course, on the video. This happened at an airport,

November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1995 which is federal jurisdiction, but we want to collate that information, work together, and work with the Solicitor General to see that whatever rules we have in place for the use of a taser are safe, find a balance between the protection of the police officer but also of the person that’s being arrested. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the Premier’s answer. But this is a very serious matter, and this happens in Alberta from time to time as well.

There’s a question of the safety of the device, first of all, but also there’s the question of its misuse from time to time by police. In 2002 Randy Fryingpan was passed out, drunk. He was tasered six times in 66 seconds, and there were no repercussions for the officer that was involved there. What we need in this province are some clear guidelines for police of when they can use a taser, when they can’t, and serious sanctions if they misuse it, as has been the case a number of times. I would ask the Premier again: will he do a review of taser use in Alberta to make sure this stops? Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, it’s not only taser use. There are other issues that have come forward with respect to finding the balance. Do we have the right processes in place? We made some changes with respect to reviewing police actions. The Justice minister said he would take that into account. He’s supportive of reviewing the process. He will bring that forward to caucus, explain the process, and then we’ll take it from there. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker.

Well, I hope the government will actually take some action on this and do it before another regrettable incident happens in this province. In 2002 a constable tasered a woman in the back despite the fact she’d been arrested and was kneeling down in handcuffs. In 2004 an EPS officer tasered an arrested man who had surrendered and was lying face down in handcuffs. The judge called it excessive force. Mr. Premier, I hope that you will do this. This is not a political issue between the NDP and the government or the Liberals or anything.

This is a matter of ensuring the safety of our citizens and providing clear guidelines for police so that they know when they can use a taser and when they cannot. Will you please call for . . . The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. [interjection] The hon. the Premier has been recognized. Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I said that the Justice minister will be bringing forward a process. The hon. member is right. There are situations, you know, of whether more force was used than neces- sary. There is also the other side of the story.

We also have had police officers that were significantly, seriously injured in the line of duty. It’s so difficult to find a balance. Mr. Speaker, to the hon. member, we’ll undertake that with the Justice minister and Solicitor General. We’ll look at the rules, review them, and bring forward to the Assembly the results. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Environmental Management of Industrial Projects Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We all know that Alberta is experiencing a tremendous boom, and that has meant that some areas in the province have had concentrated industrial growth that has had some negative environmental impact. Recently the Minister of Environment announced a cumulative effects management framework that outlines a new approach of dealing with industrial development. My first question is to the Minister of Environment. Are we implementing this approach a little too late? Mr. Renner: Well, Mr. Speaker, I would say that it’s never too late.

In fact, the cumulative impact approach to environmental manage- ment is very much future focused. It’s recognizing that the pace of growth that we have in this province has the potential to have significant impact on the environment if we don’t do things differ- ently. Up until now the approach that we have taken has been on a project-by-project basis. In the future we need to be more outcomes based. We need to determine in advance what is the expected outcome and then take the necessary action to ensure that we achieve that. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Since there are several pilot projects in place but none of them are in the areas of the province where most extraction of resources takes place, can the minister let us know how the decision has been made, and can we expect this to be done on a pan-Alberta basis? Mr. Renner: Mr. Speaker, the implementation of the cumulative effects is going forward from the basis of learning from experience with various pilot projects.

To some extent we’ve already begun on the oil sands, for example, with the recent decision on in-stream flow needs and determining how we’re going to manage the water allocations on the Athabasca River. To some degree and to a large degree we already have some of the basis for cumulative effects in the oil sands. Obviously, that is one of the areas where we look forward to expanding the program as soon as possible. Mr. Lukaszuk: Can we expect this program to be implemented through all of Alberta? Mr. Renner: Mr.

Speaker, right now we are going through a process of testing, testing the type of regulation, learning from experience on the ground. We have three pilots: the Industrial Heartland; we will be implementing very shortly one in east-central Alberta; and one in southern Alberta. All of those pilot projects will be dealing with some different issues: some, more land; some, more air; some, more water. What we learn from those will then be implemented and brought together for a broader implementation across the entire province. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, followed by the hon.

Member for Leduc-Beaumont-Devon. 1:50 Health Care Aides Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Bonita Davidson, a constituent from Edmonton-Centre, is here today advocating for better wages and working conditions for personal caregivers like herself. She’s been a personal care attendant for over 25 years and has seen too many good, qualified caregivers leave the profession because wages and salaries are just too low. My first question is to the minister of health.

When will the minister increase funding to provincial home care programs and providers so that caregivers receive reasonable and competitive wages and stay in the sector? Home care is still cheaper than facility or hospital care.

Alberta Hansard November 15, 20071996 The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member raises a very important issue. We do have a concern, almost a crisis, with respect to the provision of home care and home care attendants and personal care aides, and salary is a very important part of that.

I’ve been working with my colleagues, actually, in Children’s Services and Employment, Immigration and Industry with respect to pulling together how we deal with wages in this sector and contracted-out agencies because in the service at the front end of the system in many systems, whether it’s children’s services or health or other areas, we are facing a crisis. With the tight economy and the shortage of workers that we have, we have to be able to pay more to keep good people in those areas. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Thank you.

Well, I’m glad to see that the minister is beginning to think about possibly working on it. At the 2004 first ministers’ meeting each province agreed to, one, provide first-dollar coverage for home care services; two, develop a plan for implementing these services by December of 2006, two years later; three, report annually on the progress. So my question to the minister of health is: where is this plan, and when will Albertans get to see it? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr.

Speaker, we tabled a health workforce action plan that was a product of work between three ministries in government, and in that plan we identified precisely this area that needed to be worked on. I have been working on getting the necessary budget and the necessary resources to be able to properly fund this particular area b ecause it’s an essential service to Alber- tans. It’s taking care of the most vulnerable people at a time when they need it the most. So absolutely important. We’re working on getting the budget resources in pl ace and dealing with this very issue. The Speaker: The hon. member.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you. My next question is to the Minister of Employment, Immigration and Industry. Health care aides perform a wide range of duties, from assisting clients with bathing and dressing to walking and therapy. They may be required to lift items weighing up to 20 kilograms or be on their feet for very long periods of time. My question is: what supports are available for private caregivers without WCB who get injured on the job? Ms Evans: Mr.

Speaker, I’m not aware of any private caregivers that are not covered by WCB, and I would be very pleased if the hon. member opposite would share those particular stories with me. I would be very interested in finding out exactly how we make contact. If I had that information, I would follow through. We make sure as much as possible that we look after employment standards, occupational health and safety. We added staff in this area this year. We’re very anxious to improve that.

The hon. member will remember that when we announced the workforce strategy, the minister of health also announced the use of patient lifts in many of these facilities to help the personal care attendants. I look forward to getting the information. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Leduc-Beaumont-Devon, followed by the hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Highway Construction and Maintenance Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Safety on our highways is of paramount importance to my constituents and to all Albertans. Sadly, two people lost their lives on highway 19 in my constituency yesterday.

While it’s not appropriate to speculate on the cause of this tragic accident, it is safe to say that if the highway was twinned, we may have had a different outcome. My questions are for the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation. Can the minister advise the House on the status of twinning this extremely busy highway? Mr. Ouellette: To begin with, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I was very saddened when I heard about those deaths, and my sympathies go out to the families.

As to the question about the future twinning of highway 19, we’re always concerned about any safety concerns on all the highways in Alberta, including highway 19. Even though the twinning is not in our three-year plan, Mr. Speaker, we have done the functional planning, and the detailed design work has begun. In addition, the department has begun acquiring the right-of-way. But I would also like to add that since we’ve opened the Anthony Henday, traffic counts have dropped by a thousand cars a day on that stretch of highway.

As fast as we get all of the work in place, get the budget in place, we will be looking at going ahead with the twinning. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first supplemental is to the same minister. Mr. Minister, there has been a noticeable reduction or a lack of snow fencing on highway 19 and highway 2 between Edmonton and my constituency, resulting in drifting and many accidents. Has there been a change in maintenance standards, and can we expect to see this rectified this winter? Mr. Ouellette: In fact, Mr.

Speaker, we are still using snow fences between Edmonton and Nisku and on highway 19 in problem areas, such as the fencing that we’ve just installed at the Nisku interchange. We do keep tabs on areas where drifting snow might be a problem on that highway, and we will put up a snow fence anywhere we think it’s required. We found that as more land opens up without shelterbelts, the need for snow fencing and other measures has increased. In addition to fencing, we’re also looking at other measures such as snow ridging.

That’s where they go out and make a bunch of different windrows in the fields, and that collects the snow. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final supplemental is for the same minister. Mr. Minister, how can users of these highways report maintenance emergencies encountered in their travels, and is it feasible to post signage at reasonable intervals on these highways? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, for the QE II south of Edmonton, highway 19, and other highways around the Edmonton area motorists can contact Alberta Highway Services at 1-888-255-5554.

You can also go to our department website and find all the contact information there. The department has a standard policy on how signage is posted on provincial highways. The standards focus on safety of motorists and take into account a number of factors, including distance between signs and intersections with other roads, Mr. Speaker.

November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1997 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East, followed by the hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose. Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I hope that this might be an example of the squeaky wheel getting the oil. AISH benefits have not kept up with the increased cost of living, resulting in extra stress and hardship for most of these recipients. While this government has let billions of dollars go uncollected, AISH benefits have increased only three times since 1993.

To the minister of seniors: how does the minister explain this to thousands of Albertans on AISH who are struggling to pay their rent and buy their food? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that in each of the last three years we have raised those rates for AISH. It has gone from $850 over a couple of years ago to $1,050. [interjections] The Speaker: The minister has the floor. Mr. Melchin: We also acknowledged at that time and I said last year in our budget that those w ould be priorities that we’ll look forward to. We do acknowledge the challenges that those on AISH are facing.

That’s why we made an increase last year. That’s why we continue in our business plans going forward to look at the same issue. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Pastoor: Thank you. In his mandate letter to the minister of seniors the Premier urged the minister to “develop and introduce measures to benchmark improvements in quality of life for all Albertans.” What benchmarks have been initiated? How are they evaluated? Clearly, life has not improved for those on AISH. Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, we are starting out on one of those mandates, a very good mandate, to look at the quality of life.

This wasn’t just limited to those with disabilities. That was for all Albertans. We are early in that process. But I would say that we’ve done much lately to help look at the lot of those on AISH. Part of it is not to trap them into a permanency of just having a support program. How do we build an opportunity for them to be more included in our society, in employment, and so forth? We want to look at it because it is important for those people to have those opportunities. That’s where our focus has been directed. 2:00 The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Here’s where the squeaky wheel comes in again. Increases in costs of living affect all Albertans, especially those on fixed incomes. Does the minister have any plans to increase and index AISH benefits? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, one of the things we have done relating to income, for example, is that we did raise the level of income that AISH recipients can earn without it being clawed back, a very important initiative. The other side of what we’re looking at is an annual reporting of income rather than monthly so that there can be some flexibility.

The other directions we’re looking at: we want to see that there is permanency of opportunity for those on AISH, for employability also, acknowledging that from time to time their health will be at a time when they can work and maybe a day later they can’t work. So we’re going to look at flexible arrangements, broadening those opportunities for them to participate in the workforce as well as seeing that health and income supports are there. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Elbow. Energy Regulatory Hearings Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Over the summer I have heard a number of my constituents and other Albertans raise concerns about their involvement in energy regulatory proceedings. Specifically, they are concerned about their rights to be a part of the regulatory process that oversees the development of transmission lines, and they are concerned about being heard. My questions are to the Minister of Energy. Will the minister take steps to ensure that Albertans are able to bring their concerns about power lines built on their property before the energy regulator? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have done that. We have ensured that there is full public notification of any application. We have ensured that public hearings must be held even if one person is affected by an application and requests one. There were 60,000 applications last year before the EUB, and in nearly all cases no one was adversely affected; therefore, hearings did not com- mence. Mr. Johnson: To the same minister: will the minister ensure that landowners will continue to have the ability to hire legal counsel when intervening in regulatory hearings? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Again, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have done that. Intervenor funding for landowners who are directly affected by proposed infrastructure continues to be available. Others can apply to be part of the regulatory process; however, funding may be reserved for those Albertans who are directly affected. These persons will continue to be able to hire legal counsel if they wish. Mr. Johnson: My final question to the same minister: will the minister ensure that the decisions of our regulator can be appealed within a fair and reasonable time frame? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, we have done that, and no one has ever discussed changing this. Questions of law or jurisdiction related to regulatory decisions can be brought forward to the Court of Appeal. The time period of 30 days is the same as the Alberta Court of Appeal, the highest court in our province. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Elbow, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Southwest Calgary Ring Road Mr. Cheffins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

For years this government has failed to successfully negotiate with the Tsuu T’ina nation the acquisition of land needed for the key southwest leg of the Calgary ring road. Calgarians are frustrated, and the city is understandably reluctant to act on municipal infrastructure before they know where

Alberta Hansard November 15, 20071998 the provincial ring road is going. Adding to this immense frustra- tion, the province has advanced the Tsuu T’ina casino development, which is scheduled to open this fall. This will add enormous traffic pressure on nearby communities. To the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation: why has the casino been allowed to proceed without a final agreement on the necessary ring road infrastructure? Mr. Ouellette: Mr.

Speaker, we’re working with all the stake- holders, and I honestly believe that we are negotiating in good faith and we are going to get an agreement with the Tsuu T’ina. Every- thing went through the proper processes, and we’re working on it. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cheffins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Calgarians need this road. The Tsuu T’ina nation deserves to be fairly compensated for the land. Throughout this negotiation, though, Albertans’ demand for transparency and accountability has been frustrated.

To the same minister: what estimates of cost and transfers of land in lieu have been discussed by this government? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, anyone at all knows that when you’re in the middle of a negotiation, most people don’t want any of their information given out, and we’re under the obligation to deal in good faith with the Tsuu T’ina and not let everybody know their business. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cheffins: That might be more acceptable if he hadn’t given the casino away. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The natural area of the Weaselhead is adjacent to the proposed route for the ring road.

We cannot allow this wildlife habitat and primary source of drinking water to be ruined. This would be the case if alternate routes were to be considered should the government fail in the ring road negotiations. Once again to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation: could the minister please assure us that full protection of this area will be considered and accounted for during all ring road consider- ations and developments? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I can assure everyone that water is very, very important to this government.

We will always follow all of the environmental regulations, and even though we are a govern- ment department, we still go through all the same approvals with our other departments that anyone else does. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Child Care Funding Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. According to an

article on child care published just yesterday in the Banff Crag & Canyon, a publication in the Minister of Children’s Services’ own riding, the only two child care centres in the Bow Valley both have two-year wait-lists. At the end of June Alberta received $26 million from Ottawa to support the expansion of child care sp aces in this prov- ince. Not one dime of that money has gone into creating child care spaces.

Given that there is a serious shortage of child care spaces in the province, two-year wait-lists for spaces in the minister’s own riding, why hasn’t she used the funding for its intended purpose; that is, the creation of new child care spaces all around the province? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Tarchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can assure you that we have put a huge number of dollars into child care in this past year. Just to list a few things, we have enhanced the five-point plan; we have increased wage top-ups; we’ve started the staff attraction incentive fund; we’ve created the child care bursary.

In fact, I can tell you it is working because we know that as of today we’ve created 1,600 extra child spaces in the last 10 months. We have attracted over 400 new child care workers to the industry. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Every day this government sits on this federal transfer of $26 million, it fails to meet the needs of Alberta families who are waiting, waiting for you to do the right thing. When will you use that $26 m illion that is transferred from Ottawa to create more spaces? Ms Minister, come clean on that. The Speaker: The hon. minister.

Ms Tarchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I just mentioned, I listed off a few things. We’ve also increased our subsidies to parents. We have a significant list of areas that we’ve enhanced, the five-point plan. We certainly have increased the funding significantly over the last year, and we are seeing results. Dr. Pannu: To the same minister, Mr. Speaker. Research in Australia shows that 40 per cent of revenues of ABC Learning Centres, an Australia multinational in the business of child care, come from government subsidies.

We know that multinational corporations such as ABC are making offers to buy Alberta’s child care centres as well. Can the minister assure Albertans that govern- ment daycare funding won’t be used to subsidize giant, hugely profitable companies looking to set up McDaycares in Alberta? Ms Tarchuk: Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that who we support in this province are the families and the parents, not companies. Just to make a rather important point, the government’s role is to ensure the quality and the safety of our child care programs.

We require all operators to meet the very same standards, so we do not differentiate based on who it is that owns the child care program. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. 2:10 Highway Construction and Maintenance (continued) Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Our Minister of Infrastruc- ture and Transportation has been talking about the work his depart- ment is doing to fix highways around the province, but some of my constituents say that they don’t see much road construction going on these days. My question is to the minister.

How can the minister say he’s committed to fi xing our roads when we don’t seem to see much of the construction going on? The Speaker: Okay. There; answer that one, Minister. Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I’m very pleased to let the hon. member know that we undertook a record amount of highway construction work this year. The government invested roughly $1.8 billion for the construction, repair, and maintenance of highways this

November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1999 year, which is the highest amount invested in Alberta’s history. We did about 1,200 kilometres’ worth of paving this year, which is 300 kilometres more than last year. This includes over 200 kilometres of brand new highway and 50 kilometres of brand new twinning. In fact, we received complaints that we were doing too much work and there were too many construction zones slowing people down too much. The Speaker: I can’t get involved, can I? The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

These numbers sound impressive, but my constituents say that they don’t see this work going on to alleviate the traffic problem. My question is to the same minister. Where is it being done? The Speaker: Okay, Minister. Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. member that a lot of it was done right in his home city of Calgary. We did roughly 25 kilometres of the Deerfoot Trail at the north end. We also started construction of the northeast ring road in the spring and continued construction on the northwest leg of the ring road throughout the season.

We continued twinning highway 63 up to Fort McMurray and also continued twinning highway 43 between Edmonton and Grande Prairie. We continued twinning highway 21 near Sherwood Park, and we’re rebuilding highway 9 near Drumheller. We finished the southeast leg of Edmonton’s ring road, and then we opened the new interchange in Aldersyde. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is certainly good news, but how do we know this is not just a one-time thing that will disappear next summer? Can the minister assure us this effort will continue next year and the year after? Mr.

Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, the answer is yes. This government plans to invest almost $5 billion for highways in the current capital plan, so the level of activity in the next two years will either match or exceed this year. We’ve ramped up our investment for the repair of existing highways to address a backlog of projects. We will invest $1.4 billion over the next three years to repair existing highways, which is $800 million more than the previous three-year capital plan.

We need to make these investments to address Al- berta’s growth pressures, support our economy, and we fully intend to continue building our highway network. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity, followed by the hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka. Deerfoot Trail Safety Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Now for a real question. Recent traffic collision statistics from the Calgary Police Service, covering April through September of this year, which will be tabled today, show that too many intersections on the Deerfoot Trail rank in the top 10 Calgary collision locations. These rates are far too high.

This summer the government committed to another short-term review of the Deerfoot safety, but immediate action is required. To the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation. Erecting a post and cable barrier was obviously a good preventative start. More initiative is required. What is the minister doing now to reduce these hundreds of accidents? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, we’re very concerned with safety on Deerfoot Trail, and we’re taking a number of steps to improve the road safety. One of the identified intersections, Peigan Trail, will undergo major improvements during the ’08 construction season.

Another of the identified intersections, Glenmore Trail, is slated for major improvements as early as ’09. We are also working with the city on a safety review of Deerfoot Trail, which potentially will give us a number of short-term measures to improve the road’s operation and safety. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Clearly, a large proportion of the problems on the Deerfoot relates to dangerous driving practices.

To the minister: given the high level of driver-caused casualties and accidents, is the minister satisfied with the level of provincial policing and enforcement dedicated to the Deerfoot? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I have to agree with one thing the hon. member said. It isn’t very often I do that, but I will have to agree that, yes, driver error causes 99 per cent of the collisions we have in this province. I do have to say, though, that policing of the Deerfoot is under the city of Calgary.

He should also be asking maybe the Solicitor General on this, but policing for the Deerfoot is handled by the city of Calgary. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. While driver error is the primary cause of accidents, not 99 per cent worth, the McDermid report of 2004 concluded that poor road design and maintenance were major contributors to accidents. The previously mentioned police statistics highlight the unacceptable collision rates on the Deerfoot interchanges: Memorial Drive, Glenmore Trail, 16th Avenue, 17th Avenue, and Peigan Trail.

All of these high-collision, questionably designed interchanges continue to cause great concern to Calgarians. To the same minister: why has the government not corrected the design flaws as recommended by the McDermid report? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I had just answered at the beginning that we are addressing some of the concerns on those intersections. I named two of them that we’re going to get the work done on as soon as possible.

The Alberta government has invested roughly $250 million in the Deerfoot Trail since 2000, and another $20 million worth of projects are sche duled for the ’08 construction season. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka. Potato Cyst Nematode Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I understand that a condition called potato cyst nematode has been detected in a couple of fields of seed potatoes in Alberta. This is a fairly common condition in many countries, but the United States Department of Agriculture has recommended closure of the U.S. border to all Alberta seed potatoes.

My question to the Minister of Agriculture and Food: what is the status of testing on these farms right now? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Groeneveld: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s interesting to

Alberta Hansard November 15, 20072000 note that in light of this, the CFIA has put a voluntary ban on sending seed potatoes down to the U.S. They are doing some intensive follow-ups, and I’m pleased to report that they found no further problems. But we certainly want to see that border open to the people on the farms that have tested negative for PCN. Our staff, of course, are going to work closely with the CFIA in their investiga- tion and with the USDA to fully reopen that border again. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the same minister: if the USDA continues its ban on Alberta seed potatoes, is there compen- sation for our farmers? Mr. Groeneveld: Well, Mr. Speaker, yes, of course. You know, it’s a serious concern. Producers who experience these losses, of course, will be compensated through CAIS and production insurance. We are working with the federal government so that the compensation certainly addresses the value of these potatoes as well. Happily, at this time the seed potato shipment season probably doesn’t start until after Christmas, so hopefully we can get it cleared up well before then.

The Speaker: The hon. member? Mr. Prins: No. That’s it. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore. Zoo Standards Mr. Bonko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Zoocheck Canada and the World Society for the Protection of Animals just released a report documenting more than 150 violations of Alberta’s zoo standards at two roadside zoos. This includes dirty cages with no potable water, social animals being housed alone, unlocked gates and poor fencing, and the list goes on. To the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development: why are these zoos continually not being enforced and checked? Dr. Morton: Mr.

Speaker, we were made aware of these allegations on November 6. Obviously, we’re studying the allegations. We conducted regular staff inspections of most of these private zoos, including the one under discussion here, five times in the last year. These are serious allegations, and we’ll certainly pursue them. 2:20 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Bonko: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. This has been going on since the previous minister held the portfolio – he was so proud about naming his accolades here yesterday – so I was just wondering at what point.

The new zoo standards came into effect in August 2006, and there’s supposed to be full compliance by the end of the year. Even though there have been some reports of inspections passing, there’s still evidence of gross violations. To the minister. Many Albertans and organizations are concerned about the welfare of these animals and are watching quite closely. When will the zoo standards be brought into full compliance? Dr. Morton: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’d like to begin by saying that I’m still very proud of both my predecessors, the ministers of Sustainable Resource Development. Nothing has changed there.

Again I repeat: our staff checked these zoos as recently as three weeks ago, and there were no obvious violations. But as I said, we’ll follow up on these new allegations and take appropriate action. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Bonko: Thank you. Under the new regulations zoos had to submit to the zoo development plan to indicate how they planned to meet the new standards. When animal welfare groups requested these copies through the freedom of information process, they were stonewalled. If this government claims to be open and accountable, then there should be no hiding the information from these groups.

To the same minister: will the government release these documents to the public uncensored to show whether or not the zoos took appropriate steps to meet the standards to obtain the permits? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I’m not aware of these requests, but I’d be more than happy to work with the hon. member to provide the information that they’re looking for. The Speaker: Hon. members, that concludes Oral Question Period today. There were 88 questions and responses. When we went to Oral Question Period, we were in our Routine under the segment known as Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.

I’ll now call on the hon. Member for Calgary- Lougheed. head: Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees (continued) Mr. Rodney: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As chair of the Standing Committee on Legislative Offices I’m pleased to table the requisite five copies of the report of the standing committee recommending the reappointment of Mr. Frank Work as the Information and Privacy Commissioner for the province of Alberta. Copies of the report will be distributed to all members this afternoon. head: Introduction of Bills The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka on behalf of the hon.

Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat. Bill 47 Livestock Commerce and Animal Inspection Statutes Amendment Act, 2007 Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat I request leave to introduce Bill 47, Livestock Commerce and Animal Inspection Statutes Amendment Act, 2007. The bill will amend the Livestock Identification and Commerce Act and the Animal Health Act. Amendments to the Livestock Identification and Commerce Act will clarify the requirements and refine the legal language pertaining to security interest disclosure and directing of payment for the sale of livestock.

Amendments to the Animal Health Act will add inspection authority over livestock market facilities. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 47 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader.

November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2001 Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you. I’d like to move that Bill 47 be moved onto the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to table the appropriate number of copies of the program for the SAGE awards dinner, that took place last night. SAGE is the Seniors Association of Greater Edmonton. The honorary chairperson for this year’s awards ceremony was none other than the Member for Edmonton-Strathcona.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings here today. The first is the appropriate number of copies of a letter sent from Ms Beverley Smith, a substitute teacher in Calgary concerned about the deterioration of schools in regard to improved libraries, more caretakers, and repairs to plumbing. My second tabling is the appropriate amount of copies sent from Citizens Against Nuclear Development expressing their opposition to the proposed Energy Alberta Corporation nuclear power plant in the Peace River area. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning.

Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased and honoured to rise with two tablings today. One is the program for the dinner for Father Michael Troy honouring his 90th birthday and 60th anniver- sary of ordination. It was a wonderful dinner that filled hall D of the Shaw Conference Centre. Another example of a fine educator and priest in our community. The second tabling is the canola industry policy issues brought to many MLAs last night, things like biodiesel, international trade, and many other issues. This was presented to MLAs last night at a reception. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have four tablings today. The first is from Jaysey Carlson, who says: “Like everything else in prosperous Alberta, the cost of educating our children is increasing. Provincial grants for education are not keeping up with rising costs.” The second is from Holly Doll from Ponoka. “Bill 4 will only hurt Albertans . . . Our childcare is fine. We all like it the way it is, so don’t ruin a good thing.

Leave childcare alone.” The third is from Christine Pittet expressing concern about the homelessness in our city and province, asking the government “to make an effort to alleviate this growing problem completely.” The fourth is from Richard MacKay stating that “a $15 million dollar allocation to PDD barely cove rs the cost of inflation in this province.” Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Mr. R. Miller: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

On behalf of the Leader of the Official Opposition, as indicated earlier today, I am happy to table the appropriate number of copies of a Canadian Press report in which the Premier said that he was never made aware during his years in cabinet that an Energy ministry report recom- mended Alberta’s royalties be increased by at least $1 billion a year. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore. Mr. Bonko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to table to the members opposite the appropriate number of copies of George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.

These were given to me by demonstrators at the front of the Legislature. I shared with these individuals the belief that the government has previously allowed staff in the EUB to spy on Albertans. I would invite all government members to read the book. It should be educational. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am tabling five copies of my letter dated June 14 and my cheque to the Lethbridge Food Bank as per my pledge of April 2, ’07. Half of my MLA indexed pay raise, $146.25, is donated monthly to a food bank until AISH is similarly increased and indexed.

The Lethbridge Food Bank has 1,679 volunteer hours and feeds 42 people yearly and is directed by Amanda DeCecco-Kolebaba. My second tabling is a letter from a very concerned Albertan, Evelyn Laqua. She states that there isn’t Alberta health care, that it’s regional health care, that home care is different in all regions, that qualifications for that care are also different, that senior health care facilities are being quietly privatized and care decreased. Who can you trust? Alberta health care is “a big cumbersome corporate monster business.” The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr.

Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have three tablings. The first tabling is the 2007-08 Film and Video Arts Society of Alberta fall/winter calendar. I received this brochure when the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre and I attended FAVA’s 25th anniversary celebration on October 26. The second one is actually a CD, Mr. Speaker, with information and a video about the Cityfarm project up in northeast Edmonton. It’s like a camp for young children to learn about community and nature and how to have fun while staying out of trouble.

I was really impressed when I was given a tour of Cityfarm after these children had just had elections for their own town’s mayor, sheriff, and chief horticulturist. The website is www.city-farm.org. The third one is a tabling I’m doing on behalf of my colleague from Calgary-Varsity. Further to the questions he posed to the minister of transportation today in question period, these are the monthly traffic collision statistic s for April through September obtained from the Calgary Police Service. Thank you. 2:30 The Speaker: Hon. members, are there others? The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Sorry.

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. A number of tablings I would like to do today on behalf of my colleague the Member for Edmonton-Riverview. The first is copies of a public presentation done to the Royalty Review Panel by the shadow

Alberta Hansard November 15, 20072002 Minister of Energy on May 14, 2007, outlining a royalty policy. The second is copies of the printout from the Alberta royalty review website confirming that that member did in fact present. I’d also like to present the appropriate number of tablings of a media release in which the leader outlines commentary on the Liberal policy on the royalty review, followed by the appropriate number of copies of the video transcript of a speech that he gave on October 23 on the Liberal policy on royalty reviews, and, finally, Mr.

Speaker, a speech that was done to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce on October 25 also outlining the Liberal policy on royalty review. Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker. head: Tablings to the Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following documents were deposited with the office of the Clerk pursuant to the Legisla- tive Assembly Act and the Government Accountability Act on behalf of the minister responsible: Advanced Education and Technology annual report 2006-07, Agriculture and Food annual report 2006-2007, Alberta Children’s Services annual report 2006- 2007, Education annual report 2006-2007, Employment, Immigra- tion and Industry annual report 2006-2007, Energy annual report 2006-2007, Environment annual report 2006-2007, Executive Council annual report 2006-2007, Finance annual report 2006-2007, Health and Wellness annual report 2006-2007, sections 1 and 2, Infrastructure and Transportation annual report 2006-2007, Interna- tional, Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Relations annual report 2006-2007, Justice annual report 2006-2007, Seniors and Commu- nity Supports annual report 2006-2007, Service Alberta annual report 2006-2 007, Solicitor General and Public Security a nnual report 2006-2007, Sustainable Resource Development annual report 2006-2007, Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture annual report 2006-2007, Treasury Board annual report 2006-2007.

On behalf of the hon. Dr.

Oberg, Minister of Finance, pursuant to the Government Accountability Act Measuring Up: Progress Report on the Government of Alberta Business Plan annual report 2006- 2007, consolidated financial statements of the government of Alberta annual report 2006-2007; pursuant to the Securities Act the Alberta Securities Commission 2007 annual report; pursuant to the Alberta Cancer Prevention Legacy Act the Alberta cancer prevention legacy fund financial statements dated March 31, 2007; pursuant to the Alberta Capital Finance Authority Act the Alberta Capital Finance Authority 2006 annual report; pursuant to the Government Account- ability Act budget 2007 first-quarter fiscal update 2007-2008, Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research endowment fund financial statements dated March 31, 2007, Alberta heritage scholarship fund financial statements dated March 31, 2007, the Alberta heritage science and engineering research endowment fund financial statements dated March 31, 2007, the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation annual report 2006, ATB Financial 2007 annual report.

On behalf of the hon. Mr. Horner, Minister of Advanced Educa- tion and Technology, pursuant to the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Science and Engineering Research Act Ingenuity Inside 2006- 2007 annual report, Alberta Ingenuity triennial report 2003-2006, Alberta Prion Research Institute 2006-2007 annual report. On behalf of the hon. Mr. Liepert, Minister of Education, school jurisdictions’ audited financial statements for the year ended August 31, 2006, sections 1, 2, and 3. On behalf of the hon. Mr.

Johnston, chair, Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund Committee, Alberta heritage savings trust fund annual report 2006-2007, Alberta heritage savings trust fund first- quarter update for three months ended June 30, 2007. head: Projected Government Business The Speaker: The hon. Official Opposition House Leader. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. At this time I would ask the Government House Leader to please share with the Assembly the projected government House business for the week commencing Monday the 19th to Thursday the 22nd of November, please. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr.

Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Of course, on Monday, November 19, the House would deal with private members’ business, so there wouldn’t be government business scheduled for that day. On Tuesday, November 20, after Orders of the Day we anticipate that the results of the second quarter will be tabled. We then would proceed with discussion on sec ond reading of Bill 46 and in Committee of the Whole progress on Bill 1 if it’s s till before the committee, Bill 2, and possibly Bill 31.

On Wednesday, November 21, we expect to receive messages from His Honour the Lieutenant Governor with respect to supple- mentary supply; Committee of the Whole again progress on Bill 1 if still before the committee, Bill 2 if still before the committee, Bill 31, and Bill 40; and second reading on Bill 46. We anticipate, subject to the pleasure of the House, that on Thursday, November 22, under Orders of the Day we will be in Committee of Supply to deal with the messages from His Honour the Lieutenant Governor.

The Speaker: Hon. members, might we revert briefly to Introduc- tion of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (continued) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lesser Slave Lake. Ms Calahasen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is a rare occasion that I have the privilege of introducing anyone from my constituency in this House. Today I have that privilege of introducing to you and through you to the members of this Assembly a bright young businesswoman from Widewater, Alberta.

Not only does she have her own consulting company, called Milestone consulting, she has also been newly re-elected as a councillor to the MD of Lesser Slave River No. 124. She is seated in the members’ gallery, and I’d ask Darcie Acton to please stand and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre on a point of order. Point of Order Factual Accuracy Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The citations are 23(

h) and (j), and this is specific to the Premier claiming at the end of one of his questions that the Liberals, or more appropriately the Official Opposition, have no policies on royalties or on the

November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2003 royalty review. I have already tabled a number of documents at the appropriate time which outlined repeated public presentations of the Official Opposition policy on royalties, which included the shadow Minister of Energy presenting to the panel itself on May 14, 2007, followed by media releases from October, transcripts of speeches given on October 23 and 25. I think most of those actually precede the official government response on the royalty review. So, in fact, we were out there ahead of the government.

In 23(h), making allegations against another member, the Premier clearly tried to make the allegation that we didn’t have an existing policy, and I’ve tabled the actual documentation that shows that we do. I think that the language that was used, if I refer to 23(j), was sufficiently insulting and abusive to take the notice of the House. [interjections] This is exactly what I was talking about, Mr. Speaker, when I spoke about this yesterday. There is a tone that is set by the leaders in this Assemb ly, and indeed the Premier is the leader of this Assembly, and he certainly did set the tone today.

I don’t think it’s a tone that the rest of us should be very proud of. So I would argue that comments like that, particularly where they are inaccurate – and I have provided the documentation to prove they’re inaccurate – should not be made, and I would ask that the comments that the Premier made be withdrawn. Thank you. 2:40 The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader on this point of order. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think it’s hardly a point of order.

Interestingly enough, it was told to me by somebody who obviously had too much time on their hands at the moment that they had actually done a review of all of the Leader of the Opposi- tion’s statements and speeches from prior to the last election, through the last election and since, up until the spring of this year and in that review had failed to find any reference to the Leader of the Opposition talking about the need for a royalty review.

In fact, it’s very apparent from that type of a review that the Leader of the Opposition had not been at all on the issue of royalty review until the new leader of the Progressive Conservative Party during the campaign prior to becoming that position, the person who ultimately became Premier and followed through on the promise to review royalties, made it an issu e during the leadership campaign. It never was an issue that was brought up by the Liberal Party or by the Official Opposition prior to that time.

I don’t have the Blues in front of me, but the Premier in referenc- ing in question period today that he’d never heard from the leader of the Liberal Party on the topic was clearly referencing the fact that over the past two years there has been very little said by the Liberals with respect to the question of th e need to review royalties. It became an issue when we identified it, when the Premier of this province, as a candidate for the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party, indicated that there needed to be a review of royalties from the time, raised it, and then did it.

I can understand the sensitivity coming from the opposite side. I’m not sure it’s a point of order that the hon. member has now tabled various documents to try and demonstrate to this Legislature and to the public of Alberta that they actually do think about royalties. We can now read those things, and we can determine whether, in fact, those statements are a well-thought-out policy or not. It’s now clear that on Octobe r 23, I think she said, the policy was tabled. That’s available for people to read.

Clearly, in the cut and thrust of question period the Premier was responding to the concept that the Liberals never had a policy on royalty review up until the royalty review was called. Even then it’s very clear from the record that when the royalty panel was empanelled, they were very critical of the panel itself. So to come as latter-day converts to the concept of royalty review – it’s very clear where each of the parties stands from that perspective. They have a policy now. That’s a wonderful thing. The Speaker: Are there others? The hon. Member for Edmonton- Castle Downs on this point of order. Mr.

Lukaszuk: Thank you. Whether there is or isn’t a point of order, you, Mr. Speaker, will be the one to decide, and I’m sure you will rule accordingly. However, the merit of the point of order is what the Premier has indicated as Liberals not having a policy. Mr. Speaker, if you ever have enough spare time – and I don’t suggest that anyone has enough spare time to go to the extent of doing that – I would challenge you to review the hon. Leader of the Official Opposition’s web page, on which he proudly lists all of the speeches he has ever delivered prior to the 2004 election. There are dozens of them.

If you were to do that, you would find that the term “royalty review” or any reference to reviewing the royalty structure for the province of Alberta for natural resources is not mentioned, I dare to say, once. As a matter of fact, in the platform of the Liberal Party for the 2004 election that has never been mentioned. We know where the NDP stands on the royalty review. The Speaker: I’d like the hon. member to please focus on this point of order. Mr. Lukaszuk: I know that the Minister of Energy has challenged the Leader of the Official Opposition to contribute, and that has not been done.

So I think it’s a fair assumption that there was no platform. The Speaker: Anybody else on the point of order? The hon. Minister of Energy. Mr. Knight: Yes, Mr. Speaker, on the point of order. Mr. Speaker, I indicated yesterday, and I do believe that . . . The Speaker: A citation will help us focus. Proceed. Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the Premier’s questioning and statement around the Liberal’s lack of policy, I have to suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that in fact that is the case.

As was indicated yesterday, I wrote a letter to the Leader of the Opposition and asked him to express his opinion with respect to the royalty review. No such opinion was forthcoming to this point in time. The Speaker: I think we’ve probably heard enough testimony for this. The hon. Official Opposition House Leader cited 23(h), (i), and (

j) in her submission, and it’s very clear what those segments have. All members of the Assembly have the Standing Orders before them. Here’s what actually was said, the latter part of what the response was from the Premier: “During this period of time, in the last number of years that he served as Leader of the Official Opposition, he still has not taken a public position on the royalty framework. He’s still sitting on the fence,” at which point the Member for Edmonton-Centre, the Official Opposition House Leader, rises to advise that there was a point of order.

We’ve heard argument from several members with respect to this and the tabling of certain documents in the House today. The chair does not recall if those documents have been tabled previously or if

Alberta Hansard November 15, 20072004 they are reasonably accessible. But with those documents now having been tabled today, that will allow all members in the next couple of days and the weekend to study these documents. They are easily accessible, and all members who may have been unsure what the position was of the Leader of the Official Opposition now can ascertain that and determine that, in their own view. Beauchesne 494 is pertinent. It says: It has been formally ruled by Speakers that statements by Members respecting themselves and particularly within their own knowledge must be accepted.

It is not unparliamentary temperately to criticize statements made by Members as being contrary to the facts; but no imputation of intentional falsehood is permissible. On rare occa- sions this may result in the House having to accept two contradic- tory accounts of the same incident. You’ve heard this before. I think this demonstrates what happens when, basically, individu- als talk about he/she/you instead of recognizing that the purpose of question period and the exchange in question period should deal with policy.

Every time we vent ure into this personal thing, we seem to have responses at the end of the question period. In essence, members should stick to policy. Members can have differences of views with respect to policy, and if we deal with that, that would really be helpful. This is something that remains an issue, and I guess we’ll continue to have points of order with respect to this.

It’s difficult for the chair to determine if there is a policy or not a policy by just sitting here, but if two members disagree as to whether or not there is a policy, the chair is bound by basically saying that sometimes the House has to accept contrary views of the same item, so that’s where that one will end. head: Orders of the Day head: Government Motions Committee Membership Change 30. Mr. Hancock moved on behalf of Mr. Zwozdesky:

Be it resolved that the following change to the Standing Committee on Community Services be approved: that Mr. Marz replace hon. Mrs. Ady as chair. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to move Motion 30. The House will know that the Member for Calgary- Shaw accepted an appointment to cabinet as the Associate Minister of Tourism Promotion in the summer.

Since that time the Member for Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills under the rules has acted as a replacement for her on the committee, and we would ask that the House now regularize that or make that a permanent change to the committee. The Speaker: Anyone want to participate? This is a debatable motion. Should we call the question? Hon. Members: Question. [Government Motion 30 carried] 2:50 Committee Membership Change 31. Mr Hancock moved on behalf of Mr. Zwozdesky:

Be it resolved that the following change to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections, Standing Orders and Printing be approved: that Mr. Lougheed replace the hon. Mr. Zwozdesky as chair. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to move Government Motion 31. The Member for Edmonton-Mill Creek has as well similarly been appointed to cabinet, to Executive Council, and the request is that the Member for Strathcona replace him as chair of the committee. The Speaker: This is also a debatable motion if members wanted to participate.

There being none, we’ll call the question on the motion put forward by the hon. Government House Leader. [Government Motion 31 carried] head: Government Bills and Orders Second Reading Bill 46 Alberta Utilities Commission Act The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Energy. Mr. Knight: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to rise in the Legislature today to speak on Bill 46, the Alberta Utilities Commis- sion Act, in second reading. As you know, I introduced Bill 46 during the spring session.

Bill 46, of course, will separate the EUB into two regulatory bodies: the Energy Resources Conservation Board and the Alberta utilities commission. This recognition of two boards with clear mandates, improved management, and fresh leadership will respond to the increased number of applications brought forward before the board due to the increased activity in the oil and gas industry and the need for an electricity-related infrastruc- ture, the infrastructure that will help meet the increased demand for electricity in the province of Alberta.

The mandate letter I received from the Premier includes the responsibility to ensure that our province has an electric system that meets our province’s growing needs, and that includes making sure that new generation capacity and transmission infrastructure are in place. I want to make a few important points, Mr. Speaker, about this increased workload on the provincial regulators. When I say increased workload, I’m referring to a 300 per cent jump in the number of applications before the EUB each year, 300 per cent. In 1995-96 the EUB dealt with just under 19,000 applications, and in 2006 they had over 60,000.

This remarkable increase is a reflection of Alberta’s prosperity, but it has also made it necessary to restruc- ture our energy regulatory process. Without the ability to move electrons from where electricity is generated to Alberta’s homes and businesses, Alberta’s progress would be severely hindered and the effects would be widespread. Policies must be in place that address many needs and expectations. How do we meet the increased demand for electricity? How do we get that electricity to Albertans? They expect their lights to come on.

How do we balance the demands for power with legitimate landowner concerns, and is our regulatory process serving Alber- tans? Is it responsive, efficient, and accountable, a process Alber- tans have confidence in? Before I get to the specifics about Bill 46, I think it’s important to provide some information about Alberta’s electric system as this lays the groundwork for the intent of Bill 46. The Alberta Electric

November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2005 System Operator, a not-for-profit company, is responsible for planning Alberta’s electrical transmission system. The AESO produces a 10-year system transmission plan every two years, files this report with the province’s regulator, and makes this document public. The most recent plan was issued in February 2007 and is available on the AESO website. The plan says that there’s a need for over $3.5 billion worth of transmission development over the next 10 years. Currently $1.5 billion in transmission investments are in progress in the province. The Speaker: You will move. Mr.

Knight: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At this point in time I would like to move second reading of Bill 46. Since 1998 demand for electricity has grown at a rate equivalent to adding two cities the size of Red Deer each year. Generation added in the last 10 years is more than Saskatchewan’s entire power supply, and Alberta’s load growth in 2007 is equivalent to Ontario’s load growth, a province with three times our population. Let me make one thing clear: Alberta’s electric system has kept pace with the dynamic growth, and we have kept the lights on.

It’s only logical that as demand increases, the electric system must continue to respond. The fact of the matter is that all electricity systems regardless of market structure require maintenance and upgrades to keep the lights on. The last major transmission projects in Alberta were constructed in the 1980s. Alberta needs new and upgraded transmission lines to meet the electricity needs of Albertans, and strong, interconnected transmission is essential in encouraging the development of more electricity generation.

Power producers are not going to build power plants if they can’t get their product to customers, so transmission lines are needed in all regions of the province. One important area is southern Alberta. With the recent removal of the 900-megawatt threshold, there is the potential for the development of thousands of megawatts of wind generation. I appreciate that after that announcement the leader of the NDP issued a news release saying that the province should move quickly to build the transmission lines to accommodate more wind power. That’s great. However, the province doesn’t build transmis- sion lines.

But it’s good to know that he agrees that it’s important to have a strong transmission system. Albertans have heard the term “a reliable electric system,” but what does it really mean? It means having enough transmission capacity to handle normal events that occur from time to time, like scheduled maintenance of a power plant or a storm or a downed transmission line. Mr. Speaker, we could get to the specifics about Bill 46. When I tabled the bill, I said that an updated regulatory system supports this government’s commitment to effectively manage growth pressure.

There is an increase in applications brought on by increases in oil and gas activity and the demand for electricity generation and transmission. Alberta has a world-renowned regulatory system for the energy industry, and this restructuring builds on that success and will ensure that Albertans have access to a robust regulatory authority as we develop our resource and utility systems. I stand by those statements today. Since tabling Bill 46 in the Legislature last spring, there has been significant public discussion about the bill’s intent.

This is an important piece of legislation, and Albertans are right to ask questions about it. I have met with citizens and landowner groups, I have listened to their opinions, and I have expressed mine as well. I can assure Albertans, Mr. Speaker, that Bill 46 has been written carefully to preserve and balance the rights of individuals and intervenors with the need for a functioning and responsive regulatory system that can serve the needs of all Albertans. There has been a lot of work done on this bill. There are a number of respected organizations that are supportive of many aspects.

These organizations do a fine job representing their stakeholders, and we have worked together to make this bill fair and effective. Today I’m happy to put on the public record facts about Bill 46. Respecting the rights and concerns of landowners and other members of the public is a fundamental principle to this government, and Bill 46 upholds that principle. Albertans expect a regulatory process that is focused, diligent, fair, and responsive to the prov- ince’s growing needs, and this government couldn’t agree more.

Let’s look at specific sections of the bill, some of which have been the subject of much public comment over the last few months.

Part 1 of the AUC Act creates the AUC and sets out its corporate governance and jurisdiction, including appointing more members to deal with the increased utility wo rkload. It also requires the appointment of a CEO to allow the AUC members to focus on their duties while the CEO deals with management and administration of the AUC. Mr. Speaker,

section 9 deals with decisions and orders. I want to clarify its intent and purpose, and the

section must be looked at in its entirety.

Section 9(1) gives the AUC the right to make certain decisions without hearings if there are no affected landowners. This is not new, Mr. Speaker. This is an authority that’s currently granted under

section 26 of the Energy Resources Conservation Act.

Section 9 balances this authority by requiring that a public hearing must be held if any person’s right may be directly or adversely affected by an AUC decision. It is also important to emphasize that

section 17 explicitly requires the AUC to consider whether a proposed development is in the public interest and to take into account its social, economic, and environmental effect. 3:00 Bill 46 guarantees affected parties the right to receive notice and the opportunity to learn all the facts about an application. So to be clear: notice must be given to everyone affected, and if one person requests a hearing, one must be held, and concerns must be taken into account. I want to add that landowner rights are further protected by the fact that the AUC must comply with the Adminis- trative Procedures and Jurisdicti on Act with respect to rules on procedural fairness.

Section 9(4) gives the AUC an ability to require testimony in written rather than oral format. The EUB currently has this authority in

section 40 of the PUB Act, and it’s been used before. Again, Mr. Speaker, this is not new. This will not be the usual practice, but it may be appropriate to handle proceedings in certain circumstances. These would be highly technical matters such as the determination of gas cost recovery rates. Sections 21 and 22 deal with intervenor funding, and I want to be very clear about this section, Mr. Speaker, as there have been some public statements about these matters that are simply wrong. There are two sets of hearings where intervenor funding can be applied: infrastructure hearings and rate hearings.

In facility and infrastruc- ture hearings, such as those for transmission lines, all landowners who are directly and adversely affected will continue to be eligible for funding to represent their interests. Other interested Albertans who aren’t directly affected may apply to intervene in hearings as they do today, but these individuals will be responsible for their own costs. This in no way affects landowners’ rights to retain legal counsel. For hearings such as rate applications small consumers would be represented by the Utilities Consumer Advocate.

The Utilities Consumer Advocate will have an expanded and more proactive role

Alberta Hansard November 15, 20072006 in representing small consumers at rate hearings. The Utilities Consumer Advocate will be funded through electric and natural gas distribution tariff charges on those customers the consumer advocate represents. Consumer groups play an important role in the regulatory process. Five consumer groups have come together through a memorandum of understanding and agreed to pool their interventions under the UCA and sit on an interim governance board with similar powers as envisioned under the bill.

The organizations are the Alberta Federation of Rural Electrification Associations, the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association, the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties, the rural gas co-ops, and the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. Other groups can still partici- pate in the process if they choose, but if they go outside the repre- sentation of UCA, they would be paying their costs. Intervenor funding for consumer groups is part of the approved rates that Albertans pay on utility bills. Intervenor costs and rate hearings were $3.3 million last year, Mr.

Speaker, and $6.7 million in 2005. This funding would now be reserved for customers that are affected by energy development. In urgent circumstances Alberta’s regulatory agency must be permitted to give orders without notice; for example, in the event of a generator failing or a transmission line failure.

Section 24 gives the AUC authority to take immediate action to issue orders in an emergency or other situations requiring urgent action. This is not new. Again, Mr. Speaker, this power is already contained in the PUB Act. I can assure Albertans that this measure is to be used in emergencies or matters that require urgent attention. It is not intended for infrastructure projects.

Section 29 provides the terms under which a person may appeal to the Court of Appeal. It specifies that leave to appeal must be filed within 30 days. It does not specify when the appeal must be heard or completed. This is not new, Mr . Speaker. In fact, this is taken directly from the current Alberta Energy and Utilities Board Act, and the

section reaches a balance between ensuring due process and allowing for a reasonable time frame to settle matters. The UCA will have an expanded role in representing consumer interests in AUC proceedings. Again, I would like to say that the Utilities Consumer Advocate has served Albertans very well in the past, and it will continue to do so. Many consumer groups are pleased with the role of the UCA and the role that it will play in the future. The independence of the office of UCA will be preserved by the office taking its direction from its own governance board.

Appropriate expert, technical, and legal services will be made available to best represent small consumers. The UCA will be funded by the small consumers it represents.

The benefits of a centrally established organization to represent small consumers will be to strengthen the effective position of small consumers in hearings by consolidating the arguments, formerly made by multiple intervenors, to reduce the total number of intervenors, many of whom are representing a same or similar argument, which would reduce the time and cost to conduct hearings, and to ensure that the technical and legal counsel representing small consumers are experts in the field of utility regulation, providing strong arguments on behalf of small consumers.

Individual consumers who wish to be represented by the UCA are encouraged to communicate their issues to the office of the UCA, and the UCA is given the new obligation to proactively seek out the opinion of small consumers. Mr. Speaker, sections referring to the MSA not being under the jurisdiction of the Auditor General are not new. Under current legislation, the EUA, the MSA has never been under the jurisdiction of the Auditor General. Under

section 50 of Bill 46 the MSA “shall appoint an independent auditor to review and audit its financial statements.” Further, under

section 53 the MSA must prepare an annual report that is made public. Finally, there have been some claims that Bill 46 w ill apply retroactively to 2003. Again, Mr. Speaker, this is not the case. Bill 46 confirms that need must always be considered. The act simply clarifies that need does not have to be addressed more than once during different parts of the regulatory process. Bill 46 clarifies existing legislation to make an administrative correction to the Hydro and Electric Energy Act.

The overlap has led to some uncertainty, and Bill 46 clarifies at what stage of the regulatory process the need for new transmission lines should be considered. However, this will not change the fact that need must be formally considered as part of the process. Mr. Speaker, I conclude my remarks on Bill 46. Let me be clear about public hearings. Full public notification of any application must be made. A public hearing must be held if one person would be directly or adversely affected by any application. If no person requests a hearing or if no one is adversely affected, a hearing would not be required.

The AUC will continue to be able to review and vary any past decision, just like they do now. Under Bill 46 questions of law or jurisdiction related to regulatory decisions can be appealed to the Court of Appeal, just as they can now. Let me be clear about intervenor funding. Intervenor funding for small consumers will continue through the UCA. Intervenor funding for local intervenors who are directly or adversely affected by proposed infrastructure would be available through the AUC. Bill 46 does not prevent any intervenor from appearing before the AUC.

However, only directly affected intervenors receive f unding in infrastructure hearings. As Minister of Energy it’s my responsibility to ensure that our province has an electricity system that meets our province’s growing demand. This includes having a regulatory process that the citizens have confidence in, that finds a balance between the needs of affected landowners and the overall need of Albertans to have the lights come on when they flick the switch. This includes having the transmission infrastructure in place for today and to address the anticipated growth in years to come. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. 3:10 Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much. [interjections] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar has been recognized. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you. It’s a pleasure to participate in the debate this afternoon on Bill 46. It’s certainly a contentious piece of legislation. I listened with a great deal of interest to the hon. Minister of Energy in his explanation of this bill. It was quietly introduced here in the Legislative Assembly in June.

Since then, our office has received call after call after call and we’ve received e-mail after e-mail after e-mail regarding this legislation, and all these calls and e-mails have been questioning the direction the government is going in. Now, certainly, in light of recent events, the spying scandal at the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, some Albertans – and these are the ones that we are talking to – are now very concerned about this proposed Alberta Utilities Commission Act.

I was quite pleased to learn the other day that the Premier is contemplating amendments to this legislation even before we have had any discussion on this

November 15, 2007 Alberta Hansard 2007 legislation at second reading, so that certainly indicates to me, Mr. Speaker, that there is a lot wrong with this bill. I don’t know how it was drafted. I don’t know who was responsible for the drafting of this legislation, but certainly landowners and consumers have a lot of questions. Who was consulted? Who knows? But we do know that there are major flaws in this legislative proposal. One can only surmise, Mr.

Speaker, why at this time this govern- ment went ahead with this legislation, but certainly there’s an indication – and this is from the government themselves – that in light of what happened at the regulatory hearing in Red Deer and in Rimbey, the government has decided to limit and restrict public participation in the hearings. They say this themselves. This is in regard to oral testimony, and this is under

section 9(4) of Bill 46, which gives the Alberta utilities commission the right to refuse to hear oral testimony during a hearing. The government surmises that while there may be benefits from oral testimony, there is the potentia l for emotions to overtake the actual considerations of the situation. The Alberta utilities commis- sion has a need to encourage calm consideration and must have the right to make decisions base d on written submissions in some circumstances. Now, is that democratic? I certainly think not, Mr. Speaker. What could we do to improve this bill?

Well, certainly, there are going to have to be lots of amendments, and it is interesting that the hon. Minister of Energy didn’t mention any deficiencies in this legislation. It is clear that in

part 10 – and the government should be offended, Mr. Speaker, that this has gone from the drafting table to the floor of this Assembly. Here under

part 10, Transitional Provisions, Related and Consequential Amendments, Repeal and Coming into Force, everything from

part 10 through to the retroac- tivity clause to 2003, all this part of this legislation, this proposed bill, can be changed through regula tion. This is clear in

section 95(9). The hon. minister didn’t mention this, but it states in here, “If there is a conflict between a regulation made under subsection (7) and a provision in this Part, the regulation prevails.” How can a regulation prevail over a statute? We know what happened to the federal Conservatives when they tried that with barley marketing, and we know what the courts had to say. Why is this being allowed on the floor of this Assembly? Why is this government, if it’s open and transparent, trying to force on the floor of the Legislative Assembly a bill that will have a regulation override part of the statute?

Not only would that regulation override a part of the statute; the regulation made under this

section may be made retroactive to the extent set out in the regulation. The hon. minister in his opening remarks certainly didn’t mention that. That, hon. minister, is completely, utterly undemocratic, and the hon. minister knows it. Now, Bill 46 will restrict Albertans’ other democratic rights. This bill, incredibly, was drafted at the same time as the spies were hired by the government agency to eavesdrop on citizens in Rimbey. When we look at this bill, it’s repealing the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board Act, and we are setting up this Alberta utilities commission.

One has to assume that this bill appears to be written by an autocratic government determined to ignore both consumers and landowners in order to speed up the energy regulatory process. The reason why this energy regulatory process has to be sped up in the first place is because of the failure of electricity deregulation. The hon. minister knows the complete, dismal failure that has occurred. Certainly, we have this massive backlog not only in upgrading and expanding our transmission system but in our baseload generation, which has not kept up to the expanding electricity grid. It hasn’t kept pace, Mr.

Speaker, and it hasn’t kept pace because of the chaos and confusion that was created because of electricity deregulation. Now we