Alberta Hansard — 16 April 1985, Afternoon sitting (14:30) (Legislature 20, Session 3)

19850416

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

April 16, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 397 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Tuesday, April 16, 1985 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill Pr. 1 Heritage Savings & Trust Company Amendment Act, 1985 MR. ALEXANDER: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to intro duce Bill Pr. 1, the Heritage Savings & Trust Company Amendment Act, 1985. The purpose of this Bill is simply to recapitalize the company. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 1 read a first time] Bill Pr. 2 Westerner Exposition Association Act MR. McPHERSON: Mr.

Speaker, I request leave to intro duce Bill Pr. 2, the Westerner Exposition Association Act. The principle of the Bill is to exempt the Westerner Exposition Association from assessment and taxation of the land on which it is currently situated. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 2 read a first time] Bill Pr. 3 David Michael Skakun Adoption Termination Act MR. PURDY: Mr.

Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill Pr. 3, the David Michael Skakun Adoption Termination Act. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 3 read a first time] Bill Pr. 5 Les Soeurs de Sainte-Croix, Province Sainte-Therese — Sisters of Holy Cross, Saint Theresa Province Act MR. HIEBERT: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill Pr. 5, Les Soeurs de Sainte-Croix, Province Sainte- Therese — Sisters of Holy Cross, Saint Theresa Province Act. The Bill deals with affairs for the Order of the Sisters of Holy Cross. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 5 read a first time] Bill Pr. 8 City of Edmonton Authorities Amendment Act, 1985 MR.

HIEBERT: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill Pr. 8, City of Edmonton Authorities Amendment Act, 1985. The Bill basically deals with appointments and terms of office for the various authorities set up by the city of Edmonton. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 8 read a first time] Bill Pr. 6 Concordia Lutheran Seminary Amendment Act, 1985 MR. SZWENDER: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill Pr. 6, Concordia Lutheran Seminary Amendment Act, 1985.

The purpose of this Bill is the power to grant certificates, diplomas, and academic degrees in divinity. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 6 read a first time] Bill Pr. 7 The St. Louis Hospital, Bonnyville Amendment Act, 1985 MR. DROBOT: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill Pr. 7, The St. Louis Hospital, Bonnyville Amendment Act, 1985. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 7 read a first time] Bill Pr. 9 Le Diocese de St. Paul Amendment Act, 1985 MR. SZWENDER: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill Pr. 9, Le Diocese de St.

Paul Amendment Act, 1985. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 9 read a first time] Bill Pr. 10 Westcastle Development Authority Act MR. STILES: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill Pr. 10, the Westcastle Development Authority Act. The purpose of this Act is to permit the town of Pincher Creek and the municipal district of Pincher Creek No. 9 to incorporate an authority to develop the Westcastle rec reation area. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 10 read a first time] Bill Pr. 11 The Calgary Municipal Heritage Properties Authority Act MR. OMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I should like to introduce Bill Pr. 11, The Calgary Municipal Heritage Properties Authority Act. This Bill would create within the city of Calgary a corporate body which would have the right to acquire,

398 ALBERTA HANSARD April 16, 1985 develop, manage, and operate any right or property which the authority deems to be a heritage resource in the city. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 11 read a first time] Bill Pr. 12 Highfield Trust Company Repeal Act MR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill Pr. 12, Highfield Trust Company Repeal Act. This Bill will repeal the Act which incorporated the company. The company never commenced operation as a trust company and has since dissolved.

The Act is therefore redundant, and a petition to repeal it has been presented by the liquidator of the company. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 12 read a first time] Bill Pr. 13 Society of Management Accountants of Alberta Amendment Act, 1985 MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill Pr. 13, the Society of Management Accountants of Alberta Amendment Act, 1985. This Act is primarily to change the accounting designation for this profession. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 13 read a first time] Bill Pr. 14 The Youth Emergency Services Foundation Act MR. ALEXANDER: Mr.

Speaker, I request leave to intro duce Bill Pr. 14. The Youth Emergency Services Foundation Act. The principle is to incorporate the Youth Emergency Shelter Society of Edmonton into The Youth Emergency Services Foundation. [Leave granted; Bill Pr. 14 read a first time] head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table a report pursuant to

section 31(6) of the Legislative Assembly Act, and with it the reply to Motion for a Return 162 of 1984. which provides more detailed information. MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the most recent annual report of the Alberta Association of Registered Nurses. MRS. OSTERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I am tabling the 1983 annual report of the Superintendent of Insurance, the '83- 84 annual report of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, and the 33rd annual report for the year 1984 that is requested under the Public Contributions Act. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS MR. PLANCHE: Mr.

Speaker, I'm delighted today to introduce to you and my colleagues in the Legislature 29 young Alberta citizens from grade 6 in Chinook Park school in Calgary Glenmore. I had a very nice meeting with them today. They're very interested in what's going on here, Mr. Speaker, so I want you to pay attention to your duties. I ask that the members of the Legislature acknowledge their presence. MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank teacher Richard Wilson and parent Mrs. Kittliz for bringing 24 grade 6 students from the Avonmore school to the Legis lature. They are looking forward to the question period.

I ask them to rise to be welcomed to this Assembly. MRS. LeMESSURIER: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to intro duce to you, and through you to members of the Assembly, 14 grade 10 students from Victoria Composite high school. They are accompanied by their teacher, Mrs. Shirley Arm strong-Kates, and student teacher Susan Boytang. They are seated in the public gallery, and I ask that they please rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. MR. KING: Mr.

Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to have the opportunity to introduce to you, and through you to Members of the Legislative Assembly, 32 students from the grade 10 program at Concordia College in the constituency of Edmonton Highlands. They're accompanied by their teacher, Mr. Willie, who has visited with us on many occasions. They are seated in the public gallery. I think it's particularly appropriate that they are here this afternoon for the introduction of a private Bill that relates to the operation of Concordia College.

There may be one or two students in this class who will go on to study in the seminary, but as is the case with most grade 10 classes. I'm sure it's not going to be all of them. Would they rise to receive the welcome of the Assembly. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Hazardous Waste Disposal MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct the first question to the Minister of the Environment. Yesterday the minister said he did not have available even an estimate of the volume of PCBs that are now stored in Alberta awaiting disposal. Has the minister gotten around to finding this crucial information?

If not, when might this Assembly find out this information? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, does the hon. member mean all wastes stored in the province? MR. MARTIN: I was talking about Kinetic and the PCBs we were talking about yesterday. MR. BRADLEY: I don't have an exact figure with regard to PCBs. Mr. Speaker, but the department has a ballpark figure of some 5.000 tonnes of contaminated material stored by Kinetic at the facility in Nisku. MR. MARTIN: Five thousand tonnes; that's interesting.

On March 20 in this Assembly the minister said he had no idea what the cost to the Crown would be of dealing with the hazardous materials of the bankrupt D & D Group at Nisku. which the province is now stuck with. My question to the minister is: in the ensuing month or so has he gotten together any information on the volumes stored there and the potential cost to the Crown at this time?

April 16, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 399 MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, as I explained on March 20, the province will be exploring avenues with regard to recovery of costs. I'm advised that there are some 700 tonnes of material at the D & D facility. MR. MARTIN: So the minister is saying that at this point we don't have the cost to the Treasury of that. Let me go from there to the Kinetic Ecological Resource Group. I raised the financial capabilities of the Kinetic group with the minister on May 2, May 24, and May 25, 1983, in this House.

My question to the minister is: what bonding or other protective arrangements has the minister come up with to prevent our being stuck with all the waste at the Kinetic site in the same way we've been stuck with it at the D & D site? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, I can advise the Assembly that on March 20 the department contacted Kinetic Ecological Resources with regard to the bonding requirements, in terms of any new material which would be stored at their site, and arranged for new material to be bonded. I think that responds to the question. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question.

I'm asking now if there is any arrangement. The minister is well aware that there is a tremendous amount of material stored at Kinetic. What will happen if they go the way of D & D? Have we got some bonding or some protection for that? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, to some degree that's a hypothetical question. I think I've responded that bonding must be in place on any new material that's stored there.

I think I explained to the House earlier that the Special Waste Management Corporation is exploring and negotiating with that particular corporation with regard to its future role in the special waste management system in the province. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Hypothetical or not, there have been well-publicized financial problems there. We know what happened at D & D, and we're stuck with it. Kinetic has been importing PCBs from all over the country for many years. There are estimates of some 12 percent of the nation's total.

My question to the minister is simply this: is the minister saying to this Assembly that there really is no arrangement at all to protect us if Kinetic goes into public bankruptcy? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, legislation was introduced last fall, and those amendments were proclaimed this spring, with regard to how the Special Waste Management Cor poration was empowered to handle these situations. The legislation has been in effect since March 13. I've advised the House that the corporation is negotiating with that specific company in terms of its future role in waste management in the province of Alberta. MR.

MARTIN: A supplementary question. With all due respect to the minister, that's not answering the question. I'm well aware of the legislation. My point is: knowing the financial straits of this company, is it possible that we will end up taking it over, as we did D & D? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, the legislation provides the framework in which the province can operate, and it provides the Special Waste Management Corporation with certain responsibilities.

They are carrying out those responsibilities, and they are negotiating with the specific company with regard to what role it will continue to have in waste management in the province. MR. MARTIN: It's obvious, by those answers, that this Treasury could get stuck for a fair amount of money. Mr. Speaker, on March 15 the president of the Kinetic group was quoted as saying he would continue to import PCBs into Alberta whether or not he had a permit. My question simply is: can the minister indicate how he is ensuring that that importation will stop after May 15? MR. BRADLEY: Mr.

Speaker, there are certain authori zations the Special Waste Management Corporation is pre pared to provide that corporation. If those authorizations are exceeded, we will use whatever means possible within the law in the province of Alberta to ensure that those authorizations are carried out. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question to the minister. The chairman of the Special Waste Management Corporation is quoted today as saying that Kinetic will be allowed to transfer PCBs around Alberta until September 30.

Can the minister or the Minister of Transportation and of Disaster Services advise what protection is in place to prevent recurrence of what recently happened in Kenora with the Kinetic truck? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, there are certain provisions by which that company would be hauling and transporting wastes within the province. There is the federal Transpor tation of Dangerous Goods Act, which has not yet been proclaimed but which is being followed in a voluntary fashion by companies in the province at this point in time. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question.

Other than that federal Act they're talking about coming into place, is the minister saying that no special precaution is being taken in the province by this government at this time? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, with regard to the transport of these goods, they are following a voluntary manifest system which tracks the goods and following whatever provisions and regulations are now in effect with regard to the transportation of those goods in the country. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question.

Could the Min ister of Transportation and of Disaster Services indicate what would happen if we had a similar situation as recently happened in Kenora? Do we have plans in place to deal with a disaster like this? MR. M. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I think the Minister of the Environment adequately answered that question. Insofar as the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Control Act and regulations attached to it are concerned, this Legislature passed the legislation some time ago. We have been working for a period of about three years to encourage the federal government to issue preliminary draft regulations.

That was finally done last December. We're now in a process period of about 12 months wherein we expect the industry to be able to comply with the regulations that have been drafted with respect to the transportation of dangerous goods and hope that early in 1986 the regulations will be finalized and be law. In the meantime, as the Minister of the Environment has indicated,

400 ALBERTA HANSARD April 16, 1985 there has been extremely good voluntary compliance with the draft regulations and with the regulations that were in effect before that under legislation that is the responsibility of the minister. MR. MARTIN: One final supplementary on this to cither minister. What contingency plans are being developed for transportation of hazardous wastes to the Swan Hills plant in the future? For example, are only certain roads going to be used? Are any plans being developed at all? MR. M.

MOORE: With regard to the transportation of all dangerous goods, the hon. member should be aware that there is a very complex system of designating certain routes within the province for the transportation of dangerous goods. The new legislation and the regulations attached to it will be even more extensive in terms of the manner in which dangerous goods will be handled, placarded, and so on. That is all in addition to the legislation the Minister of the Environment has responsibility for regarding the transpor tation of chemicals, which he has already referred to. Mr.

Speaker, I believe it's fair to say that in the area of the transportation of dangerous goods, both hazardous chemicals and other dangerous goods, Alberta is a leader in Canada in not only the development of the legislation but being prepared to handle situations that might arise from time to time with respect to spills. MR. MARTIN: We're certainly a leader in the country in bringing in hazardous wastes; there's no doubt about that. It's a growing industry. Native Self-Government MR. MARTIN: I'd like to direct my second question to the Premier.

It's with regard to the most recent conference he attended on native rights. Would the Premier indicate on what basis or studies he has developed his position that a constitutional amendment to entrench aboriginal rights would not, as I believe he put it, significantly improve the quality of life for our aboriginal people? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I don't think that's quite the context in which I've responded to the situation. What has to be made clear first is that there has been no adequate definition of what is proposed by way of self-government for the Indian, Inuit, or Metis people.

There's a wide difference in their view as to what their aspirations are. There's a significant lack of definition of what is intended. The constitutional process we've embarked upon arose out of the Constitution Act and the discussions of November 1981 in which it was agreed, under

section 37 of the Constitution, that we would meet within a year. We met in 1983 to identify and define the aboriginal rights referred to in

section 35(1) of the Constitution. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question. Could the Pre mier indicate why it is his concern that entrenching a general resolution about self-government would stop the process of what he is talking about in terms of defining what aboriginals are and what their rights are? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, the more I think about the subject, the more convinced I am that you can't deal with the Constitution of Canada in terms of entrenching rights that are not defined. I really think that's the simple matter. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question.

Has the Premier met with various Alberta native associations to determine if they share his view that a constitutional amendment would not be an improvement? MR. LOUGHEED: First of all, Mr. Speaker, the treaty Indians in this province have taken the position, for which we have some support and understanding, that their position arises out of treaty rights to the Crown in right of Canada and that, therefore, the process we're undertaking is not a process they think is appropriate. The treaty Indians of this province believe that under

section 91.24 of the Constitution of Canada the exclusive jurisdiction for Indians and Indian land claims rests with the federal government. It shouldn't involve the provinces, and it shouldn't involve the provinces in terms of conferences or in terms of numbers. The treaty Indians of the province would generally like, therefore, to work out a degree to which they can improve their control over their own destiny and a degree of responsibility for their own affairs, and we have considerable sympathy for that.

As I stated in the conference in Ottawa, as far as the government of Alberta is concerned — speaking now about the treaty Indian people — it would be our view that whatever arrangements are worked out between the federal government and the treaty Indian people in this province, we would then sit down with them afterwards and interface with them in terms of the multitude of services we provide to them as Albertans. As the hon. Leader of the Opposition is aware, they briefly came into the conference room. They were given an opportunity — I'm talking about the prairie treaty group — and they made a presentation.

The pres entation on the record concurred with the position taken by the government of Alberta. We are not significantly involved in the Inuit situation. With regard to the Metis people, there are two distinctions. One is with the eight settlements and the one and a quarter million people who are involved in the settlements.* We've been working with them through Dr. MacEwan's report, which is in our hands with the group involved and being considered.

Together with my colleagues the Minister respon sible for Native Affairs and the Minister of Federal and Intergovernment Affairs, I've met with the Metis Settlements people. We've had a number of discussions with them in following up Dr. MacEwan's report. With regard to the Metis Association to the degree that they are generally representative of the Metis people in the province, we've had discussions with them. I've now written them and requested them to give us some further definition of what they have in mind in terms of the proposals that are now being discussed. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question, Mr.

Speaker. Would the Premier indicate whether the Alberta government's reluctance to settle with the Metis over resource and land rights has something to do with the resistance we place in entrenching self-government in the Constitution? MR. LOUGHEED: No, Mr. Speaker, they really have no relationship. The situation with regard to resource rights is a matter of the definition of their rights by the courts of this province, and we hope that matter will be expedited. Whatever the courts determine are the rights of the Metis *See Statement corrected on the following page

April 16, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 401 people involved in the settlements, we will of course respond to the direction of the courts. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'm sure the Premier is well aware it's been going on for a long time, and I'm sure that's part of the frustration faced by the Metis people. I understand one of the reasons they want it in the Constitution and amendments is that it would at least force some of these land claims.

My question to the Premier, to give a specific example, is: would the Premier advise if the unilateral withdrawal by the Alberta government of the traditional hunting rights of the Grande Cache Metis people in December is a signal of the manner in which this government intends to proceed on Metis rights so long as this is not in the Constitution? MR. LOUGHEED: They're really very separate matters, Mr. Speaker. It's been noted that I said "one and a quarter million people." I meant "one and a quarter million acres" in regard to the settlements.

With regard to the latter question from the Leader of the Opposition, I refer it to the Minister responsible for Native Affairs. MR. PAHL: In response to the question, Mr. Speaker, I'll recall for the hon. Leader of the Opposition that the accord signed in 1983 was an extension of the process to identify and define existing rights and possible further rights for aboriginal peoples of Canada. There are, in effect, three aboriginal peoples of Canada: the Inuit, Indian, and Metis people.

Notwithstanding the opportunity for Metis who live on settlement lands to hunt and fish, there are no existing aboriginal rights for the Metis people of Alberta. The Grande Cache situation was one wherein the members of the co-operative who live on lands provided by agreement with the Alberta government claim to be status Indians. Status Indians have the right to hunt and fish. The confusion was that the Grande Cache co-operative members held the view that it was up to government to prove they were Indians, and the governments of Alberta and Canada had the view that it was their initiative.

My colleague the Associate Minister of Public Lands and Wildlife and I had a meeting with the MLA for the area, the Member for Edson, and there was an agreement to extend the subsistence hunting program to them so that they could continue to enjoy their traditional life-style. In addition, we agreed to assist them in working with the federal government to try to ascertain whether they were indeed legally entitled to status as Indians. Then, of course, they would have hunting and fishing rights, as do all status Indians across Canada.

In fact, if they insist on being identified as Metis people, it is quite clear that the Metis outside the settlements have no aboriginal rights, particularly with respect to hunting and fishing. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question to the minister. Let's be clear on what he's saying. Is it this government's position that Metis people outside the settlements have no aboriginal rights and will not have under any future con stitutional amendments? MR. PAHL: Mr. Speaker, it's not the position of the Alberta government; it is the reality of the Constitution.

In framing the Constitution of 1982, it was agreed that the aboriginal people were defined as the Indian, Inuit, and Metis people, and they were resident with existing aboriginal rights. The reality of our country, our Constitution, and our development is that at the moment no aboriginal rights accrue to Metis people. It is not a position of this government: it is a constitutional fact. Among other things, the purpose of the constitutional rights talks that will extend to 1987 is to identify and define, by agreement, some rights beyond what exists now.

What exists now with respect to the Metis people is a recognition of the cultural and historical contribution to Canada's history, but there is no accrual of aboriginal rights flowing from that recognition. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary on this topic. MR. MARTIN: As I understand it. the constitutional talks will be coming back in May. My question is to either the Premier or the minister. Is it the Alberta government's position that the Metis should not have aboriginal rights, or is the government going to promote some sort of abo riginal rights for the Metis people at that May conference?

MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I think it's the problem the Leader of the Opposition is using in terms of rights and in terms of programs in working with the Metis people that need to be distinguished. Under

section 35(1) of the Constitution, the existing rights of the aboriginal peoples are affirmed. Aboriginal peoples, as just mentioned, include the Metis. That was at the suggestion of the province of Alberta. The responsibility for identifying and defining those rights has arisen out of

section 37 and is one that we're working on in this process. We have asked for the view of the Metis people, of course, and there are wide differences of views across the country as to what those existing rights are. But it's not our view and never has been our view that this is a matter that solely starts and finishes with the Constitution, nor should it. We believe in taking initiatives as we can to improve the situation with regard to the Metis people whether or not they're on the settlement.

We have brought in a multitude of programs, including the land tenure program, which concerns some Metis groups but has been well accepted by others. So it's our intention to continue to work as closely as we can with the various Metis communities in the province to improve their way of life and their standard of living. But I do believe one of the concerns has been that there's been a feeling that there is a panacea, that the problems are going to be resolved with regard to constitutional matters. Confidentiality of Doctors' Records MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, my question to the Attorney General is with regard to

section 13 of the Alberta Health Care Insurance Act, which gives the Attorney General the right to confidential records in criminal cases or suspected criminal cases. The minister has indicated that there may be a review of this section, which has already been passed in this session of the Legislature. Could the minister indicate whether that review will take place and if any amendments will be coming into the current session of the Legislature? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I intend to ask for further views of the law officers of the Crown on that very point, and that will be done in the next day or so. I have had occasion to observe that the matter was not one that came

402 ALBERTA HANSARD April 16, 1985 up in debate. It is a very broad issue but at the same time, given the difficulty of statutorily defining some of the things we're involved in there, one that should perhaps be looked at further. Maybe I can give the hon. member an inkling of my own views on the matter. I take the position that evidence that is available in the hands of any person and that could point to the commission of a criminal offence should be disclosed to a proper authority.

One has to balance that against the very delicate, important, and historic issue of the confidentiality of certain types of records, in particular patient records, and the presumption a lot of people have, although I know of no legal basis for it outside of what a statute might provide, that communications between a doctor and patient are privileged in some way. That is not the legal position unless a statute makes that specific provision, but it's widely assumed to be the case.

Given the concern that has been expressed, that perhaps the provisions of our existing legislation have gone too far in that respect, that's the point I would like to have reviewed and, as I indicated to the hon. member, would have further opinion on that point from the legal officers of the Crown. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. In terms of the words "suspected criminal", would the definition be part of the review as to the records that could or could not be made available to the Attorney General? It's under that classification at the present time, as I read the amendment.

Would that be a matter of a review by the minister? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I want to be sure I got the hon. member's words correctly. Suspected criminal activity? I think that is really where the area of difficulty is. There is no intention that anything other than this situation, for example, should occur.

If a professional body or someone who has in their possession the same records that are available to a professional body under their dis ciplinary procedures — for example, as records are available to the benchers of the Law Society relative to lawyers' activities within their offices, records are also available to the College of Physicians and Surgeons and their disciplinary processes relative to records in doctors' offices.

Should something in the course of an examination of the practice of some doctor come to the attention of the disciplinary arm of the College of Physicians and Surgeons and should it point to the potential of a criminal activity, that should be assessed by someone who has the duty along with the professional expertise to make that particular assessment, because it involves assessing evidence. Those persons are the law officers of the Crown, and in that sense that information should come to an agent of the Attorney General. That is the sort of thing that is done within the legal profession.

There was some controversy over it. That's a statutory provision in the Legal Profession Act. I suppose there would continue to be some controversy over the same point relative to the medical profession. This is the assurance I want to make as clear as it can be made, Mr. Speaker, and I adopt the view that the law should say what it means and not leave ways in which it might be applied in some way other than what is intended.

But if I can speak to the intention of it, it is surely not intended that any person, be he a representative of the college or a representative of the Department of Hospitals and Medical Care, should enter into something like a survey of records in order to see if offences are disclosed. It is a much different situation from that, and I hope the intent I have expressed is readily enough understood and seen to be within the normal course of gathering evidence in criminal cases. Red Meat Stabilization MR. FISCHER: Mr.

Speaker, to the Minister of Agriculture, concerning the dumping of subsidized European red meat into Canada and the extremely harmful effect it has on our meat industry. Could the minister tell us what representation he has made on behalf of the cattle and hog industries regarding the new import levels being contemplated by the federal government? MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, I can report to the Assembly that last week I sent a telex to my federal counterpart, the Hon.

John Wise, and indicated on behalf of Alberta producers that we were disturbed by the reports that the federal government was about to increase the import quota by about 26 percent. It really is happening in a year in which our industry is under difficult stress, and the magnitude of that increase is certainly negative to our whole industry. So I carefully tried to explain to the federal minister the impact it would have on our producers in western Canada. MR. FISCHER: A supplementary question. Could the min ister advise the Assembly what discussion he had with Ottawa on Bill C-25? MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr.

Speaker, I also telexed the Hon. John Wise and outlined Alberta's support for Bill C-25, and I understand the Bill is now being brought back after being dropped after first reading. Bill C-25 will really provide the authority for the federal government to undertake agreements with provinces on a national red meat stabilization program.

At this time I believe there's an opportunity for the federal and provincial governments to correct a situation that is having a damaging effect on agriculture, and they can address the agricultural policy in this country in the red meat sector in a manner that will benefit all Canadian farmers. I think this really means setting aside the desire for provincial self-sufficiency in programs, working in a North American market where we can have more freedom, and getting out of some of the short-term programs that have been put in by provinces that have caused such balkanization.

I think there could be a real service done, Mr. Speaker. I also emphasized to the federal minister that a federal/ provincial ministers' conference should be called on this issue. The objective of that would be to get a commitment from provincial governments to immediately cease operations of their provincial stabilization programs. Doing so would bring about a removal of the U.S. countervailing duty that has now been imposed on our pork producers. The challenge really is great, but I think the opportunity is certainly significant. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to follow up on the questions the hon. member just asked. I'd like to know how recently our minister has met with the Alberta pork producers to be brought up to date on the precarious nature of their business at this time. When did the minister have the most recent discussion with the Alberta pork producers?

April 16, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 403 MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Last Wednesday and last Saturday, Mr. Speaker. DR. BUCK: In those discussions, Mr. Speaker, when the minister talks about a federal stabilization program, are we going to have it while there are still pork producers left in this province or after they're all bankrupt? MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, that's a deep concern our government has also. It's unfortunate that the federal government hasn't provided that leadership and taken this Bill through.

As I stated to a previous question, it is our strong representation that we are pushing them to quickly implement that red meat stabilization program to get rid of the balkanization that is destroying our industry in this country. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. In light of the fact that the other provinces are very heavily supporting the pork industry, are we going to wait until we have a federal program or follow the other provinces and provide some support for our pork producers? MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, not all other provinces have a stabilization program.

One of the largest producers is Ontario, and it doesn't have a program. As we walk through this process, having the countervailing duty and the U.S. Trade Commission right at this moment checking all across this country what subsidy programs are in place, we have to be very careful of the approach we take in helping our producers. I don't want anyone to feel that we don't have at heart the importance of our red meat industry, and particularly our pork producers and their long- term future, in any action we take. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, I met with some of the producers last week, and the situation is very, very serious. Has the minister given any direction or had any discussions with the Agricultural Development Corporation to advise them that there might be a program coming and to hold off on some of those proposed foreclosures? The one man I sat with, Mr. Minister, said that if we don't get some help within a few months, you're going to be raising the hogs — or ADC is going to be. MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, that is certainly a concern we have in our government.

I took the opportunity to call the bank agrologist and tell him that certainly there is a problem in the industry at the moment but that the world isn't going to end tomorrow and be patient, because the chances of our being successful in turning back the countervail are very significant and the red meat stabilization plan is coming soon. So I tried to place that comfort before them. I've also had ongoing discussions with the Agricultural Development Corporation on the issue. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary.

Is the minister in a position to indicate how many foreclosures we've had by the Agricultural Development Corporation that are directly related to hog operations? Is it a significant number, or is it a number that the minister would have at this time? MR. FJORDBOTTEN: Mr. Speaker, I'd have to get that number and report back, but I don't believe it's significant at all. Native Self-Government (continued) MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to follow up on questions to the Premier on the Constitution. As I understand it, there is another conference coming up in May.

Will Alberta be advancing a new position or any new ideas to break the impasse on the self-government resolution at the May conference? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, we have some very serious reservations about this process. We expressed them in Ottawa when we were there. I will repeat what I said earlier in this question period.

We think what should happen is that the federal government should accept their responsibilities under the Constitution for exclusive jurisdiction over the Indian people and Indian land claims and include with that the Inuit — sit down with them and work out what the process might be, which varies significantly across the country, for supporting and improving the standard of living of the Indian and Inuit people. We in the provinces that have significant numbers of Metis, which includes Alberta, should reassess the programs we have. With regard to the settlements in this province, we should look at Dr.

MacEwan's report and the recom mendations contained in that, try to move forward with regard to those recommendations relative to the settlements, expand our programming with the Metis people on a com munity basis — perhaps not on a provincewide basis if we can't work it out appropriately — and try to do so to improve their standard of living. We think that would make a great deal more sense and create a great deal more progress for the aboriginal peoples of Canada than a con tinuation of the process we've been going through for the last number of years. MR. MARTIN: A supplementary question.

I take it that the native people don't agree with the Premier on that position. What I hear the Premier saying is that, basically, the May conference is a waste of time. He doesn't even agree with the process. Therefore, nothing new is going to come from Alberta at that conference. Is that a correct clarification of the Premier's point? MR. LOUGHEED: We look at this matter in terms of improving the standard of living of the people involved, and we're not satisfied this process will do that. I would have to take issue with the

preamble to the Leader of the Opposition's question. I mentioned earlier in this question period that as far as the treaty Indian people of this province are concerned, the vast majority of them don't support the process either. They want to deal directly with the federal government. They want to rely on their treaty rights with the Crown in right of Canada. With regard to the Metis Settlement people, they want to work with the Alberta government in terms of Dr. MacEwan's report. With regard to the balance of the Metis people, we're working on programs and asking them for their proposals. MR.

MARTIN: One final supplementary, so we're well aware; it's an important issue. Is it the position of the Premier of the Alberta government that at this time they will not accept any resolution dealing with aboriginal rights? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I don't think we'd put ourselves in the position that we would not accept any

404 ALBERTA HANSARD April 16, 1985 resolution. We certainly won't accept any resolution of which we don't know the consequences, and I trust the Leader of the Opposition would hold a similar view. ORDERS OF THE DAY head: MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS 205. Moved by Mrs. Cripps:

Be it resolved that the Assembly urge the government to undertake a review of government senior citizens' housing policies and principles and consider the establishment of an ongoing senior citizen housing review committee. MRS. CRIPPS: Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I'm pleased to introduce this motion, which will allow members the oppor tunity to think about and discuss this very important issue. At the outset I want to point out that I believe Alberta has the very best senior citizens' programs in North America.

Some of the programs are designed to allow senior citizens to remain in their homes as long as they wish or as long as their health permits. Programs such as the pioneer repair program, the home heating allowance, the home care pro gram, the senior citizens' tax reduction program, and the homemaker service make it possible for many senior citizens to continue living in their homes far longer than would be possible without those programs.

If it becomes desirable or necessary for senior citizens to move out of their homes, we have low-cost housing programs such as the self-contained units, where the rent is subsidized but the senior citizen essentially maintains his own residence and provides for himself, and the senior citizens' lodge program, where all services are provided to the senior citizen. In addition to that Alberta has an excellent network of nursing homes and extended care hospital beds either fully funded or subsidized. For the purpose of this debate I want to discuss extensively the senior citizens' lodge program.

Senior citizens' lodges were first established in Alberta in 1958. I'd like to empha size, Mr. Speaker, how important it is for these lodges to be scattered throughout the province and in the smaller centres. This makes it possible for senior citizens to remain an integral part of the family, with the family being able to drop in or take mom and dad or grandma out for Sunday dinner. This contact, which is often lost when an elderly person is removed to a larger, more remote facility or centre, is very essential.

Continued family and community support is so important to the mental health and welfare of the senior citizens. The senior citizens' lodge program guidelines and phi losophies have not kept pace with the changing needs of the residents. I was unable to find the original figures for the early 1960s, but I do know that the average age of residents was much younger than it is today. In 1974-75. 3 percent of senior citizens in lodges were under 65. 25 percent were between the ages of 65 and 74. 57 percent were 75 to 80, and 15 percent were over 85.

In 1978 another survey was done, and 2.5 percent were under 65, 18 percent were in the 65 to 74 age bracket, 48 percent were 75 to 84, and 32 percent were now over the age of 85. In that four-year period the residents over 85 had jumped from 15 percent, and the total number of residents over 75 had moved from 72 to 80 percent of all those in senior citizens' lodges. This means that the needs of senior citizens in the lodges will be changing just because of the chronological differences in their numbers that are presently in the lodges. An

article in the January 1985 Reader's Digest that I picked up says: Thanks to better health care, people are living longer. Already there are about 950,000 aged over 75, and by the end of the century the number is expected to reach 1.5 million [in Canada]. I want to dwell for a minute on the physical needs which may require policy changes. I talked to a nurse the other day, and she indicated to me that many people, not just senior citizens, have incontinence problems. In the lodges it sometimes becomes cause for removal to a nursing home or an auxiliary hospital.

I discussed the problem with the director of home care. She indicated that if she could bring in a home care worker to bathe, change sheets, and generally see to the cleanliness of the residents, they were able to stay in the lodge. If there were two or three people in the lodge — and at one time she was looking after nine people in the lodge, not necessarily on a daily basis but on a weekly basis — the cost could be justified. If there was only one person it was fairly expensive, because they had to pay two hours regardless of whether there was one, two, or three.

She suggested that the lodge management might need to look at employing a personal care aide, so the needs of these people could be met in the lodge, or at co-operating more extensively with the home care program of the health units. Some of these seniors need assistance with bathing, medication, incontinence, et cetera — problems which result in removal to a nursing home. In the cases she described to me, it really was not in the best interests of the resident, the family, or the taxpayer to make the move to the nursing home.

Other than some extra personal care needs, the residents were able to function in the home and were content and happy there. What's more, they dreaded being moved. The problem of medication needs also arises. Some boards absolutely will not even allow the staff to remind a resident to take their pills. The problem could be readily solved by the use of a bubble pack. The druggist can put the medication for each day, each meal if necessary, in a bubble pack for the month. The pills are punched out as needed and as directed.

In the case of the home I was discussing earlier, the health nurse checks the bubble pack to make sure that the medication is correct. Of course, this requires the flexibility of a board to allow staff to remind residents that the pills must be taken. Mr. Speaker, I think the board would want to show this flexibility if it is in the best interests of the senior citizen residents in their lodges. The lodges are excellent physical structures and, for the most part, provide adequate if not exceptional food and lodging. The lodges are clean and neat. The food is varied, tasty, and well prepared.

One of the purposes of the senior citizens' review committee should be to assure that this is so. Mr. Speaker, one of my major concerns and a partial reason for raising this issue for discussion is the atmosphere within the senior citizens' lodges. The Senior Citizens' Advisory Council included this paragraph in their 1983 annual report: Lodges provide board and room for elderly persons, supposedly well and able to care for themselves. Some lodge residents are now receiving some personal care, either from the staff or from community services such

April 16, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 405 as home care. We suggest that more Foundation boards managing lodges look at ways of using these services in their facilities, and also expanding health surveillance and assessment and life enrichment activities for their elderly residents. These latter activities are as important as meeting the basic needs for food and shelter, and some staff time needs to be devoted to them. I believe that came from the annual meeting of the provincial advisory council. I believe it's important to re-evaluate our philosophies and policies.

It is important for the foundation to set objectives and goals. These goals and objectives must be designed to serve the needs of the senior citizen residents, not the foundation board or the staff. One foundation has set out a policy paper. It might be worth outlining just a few items.

They have a statement of purpose first, which is to provide accommodation in a caring, home-like atmos phere for senior citizens able to care for their own personal daily needs; to provide the daily aids to living of the senior citizens in conjunction with other public service agencies; to ensure that self-contained housing facilities best meet the needs of senior citizens; and to provide opportunities for residents to participate in leisure, recreational and social activities which foster their continued involvement in family and community life, within the limits of the physical, human, and financial resources available to the Foundation.

Mr. Speaker, they've recently adopted some goals too, and I think they are worth mentioning in this discussion. Number one, to provide a cheerful, homey atmosphere for seniors, where they can be sure that they are cared for as individuals. Two, to provide leadership in and provision of recreational activities and opportunities for seniors to occupy their time and energies to help them maintain or develop wholesome social contacts and activities. Three, to provide healthy, nutritional meals for residents in lodges. You notice that the home atmosphere is before the meals.

To provide safe, clean, and structurally sound physical accommodation. Five, to assist residents in conjunction with other community agencies and services to maintain their independence and well-being. Six, to ensure that all residents may reside in dignity. Seven, to encourage maximization of individual self- reliance and independence upon the framework of the lodge structure. Eight, to promote positive attitudes for all board members, staff, and residents. Nine, to develop, encourage, and promote an open and trusting atmosphere for all staff and residents.

Ten, to encourage social contacts with family and community. Eleven, to represent the interests of the lodges in municipal decisions. Twelve, to be responsible for future planning, giving consideration to changing statuses. Thirteen, to ensure that the minimum level of social and physical standards are maintained within each lodge. There are a couple more, but I think that gives an idea of the goals of the foundation. I'd just like to re-emphasize that the first two main goals are in the provision for the social and spiritual needs of the resident.

These goals clearly illustrate that the total welfare of the senior citizen resident is the priority of the board. Many of the elements which make the difference between a lodge being a residence and a home do not cost a cent. It may be a procedural or attitudinal change. I want to use the Shangri-La Lodge at Drayton Valley as an example. When one walks through the door, one feels an atmosphere of welcome, of people busy and participating, of goodwill and camaraderie. The home looks lived in. There are crafts in almost all the common areas.

Those who are not actively participating are watching, usually advising, and are inter ested in what's going on around them. The Shangri-La has a social club which plans social activities, makes recommendations to the management board, co-ordinates the craft activities, and sponsors fund-raising activities. Just before Christmas they raised $3,000 at their craft bazaar and tea. Every morning at the Shangri-La there is an exercise led by one of the staff, because they found that the residents are much more relaxed working with one of the staff than with somebody from the outside. I was there one day.

One of those exercises consists of holding a piece of paper in one hand [Then Mrs. Cripps crumpled a piece of paper] and then undoing it and spreading it out so it's flat again. If you think that's easy, just try it; it's very difficult. But it keeps the hands and the fingers flexible. It's the kind of activity you and I would never think about, but it's certainly important to the welfare and well-being of the lodge residents. A craft co-ordinator comes in every morning and works with the residents, and started crafts can be found all over the lodge: beads, egg cartons, et cetera.

Craft materials are tidied up, but they are never put away. I've been in some lodges which are clinically spotless, but the atmosphere is sterile — no craft materials left around. In fact, in some lodges the emphasis is on being able to polish the tables and dressers even in the rooms. Some lodges have a policy of not allowing anything on a surface which could collect dust or which would have to be moved to wipe off the furniture. This applies to the rooms as well as the main recreational area. In a January 1985

article from the Reader's Digest — and I'm going back to the same article, How to Choose an Old People's Home — it says: But too often rooms are impersonal. In one Ontario home I visited, every identical room was neat as a pin, and the residents, many in wheelchairs, sat grouped along the hallways, however much they might have felt like going back into their rooms for a nap. In contrast, residents in another home nearby displayed houseplants, family pictures and personal belongings. It was clear that their rooms were not merely their rooms, but their homes.

A good clue to the quality of life in a home is the amount of activity among residents. Usually this is governed by what they are encouraged — or allowed — to do for themselves. All senior citizens will tell you that moving from a home to a senior citizens' lodge is a major emotional as well as physical change. It's a new life-style. Now the mundane things are done for them, and their needs for food and accommodation are being met. Therefore, they need something new to challenge them, an opportunity to continue achieving.

In some cases they were unable to remain in their own homes because they could not handle the hou sekeeping or cooking. Quite often their health may improve after they move into the lodge, especially if their minds and hands can be kept active. The atmosphere of a senior citizens' lodge should be one that is conducive to keeping morale high, minds alert, and bodies healthy.

The Health Facilities Review Committee just assessed the Shangri-La Lodge, and I'd like to read you two par agraphs of that report: Members had an enjoyable time at the lodge visiting with most of the residents and some of their family members. All residents had positive comments about

406 ALBERTA HANSARD April 16, 1985 the kindness of staff and the comfortable, homey atmos phere. It was evident your residents and staff are proud of their lodge and make visitors welcome. The activities and the participation of residents are to be commended. Members were interested in the way the Activities' Director and the Matron managed to obtain the involvement of the residents. Needless to say, the residents and staff of the home were delighted with the report and really appreciated having the Health Facilities Review Committee come in.

Quite frankly, if a lodge is doing a good job, I think they should welcome this kind of involvement by the government and appreciate the responsibility we have. One of the residents made a comment the other day. He said the Shangri-La has a waiting list of people wishing to enter the lodge. I believe there are 12 or 14 on the list right now, and there aren't more because people know there is that list.

One of the residents of the lodge said that if some of the foundations that are scrambling to make ends meet because their occupancy is down would take a look at the involvement of the senior citizens in the Shangri-La Lodge and recognize that the waiting list is because the Shangri-La is a home, not an institution, they could resolve their their dilemma with half-filled lodges. I thought that was quite an adept statement for a senior citizen living in a lodge to make. He's right; some lodges are partially empty because of the atmosphere in the home.

Certainly there are people out there who may need or wish to be in a home but don't go because they just can't stand the thought of moving into an institution. I believe it's imperative that lodges be managed by local management committees which are vitally interested in the health and welfare of the lodge residents and in their community. There is a provision in the charter of the foundation for setting up boards of management. These local people should have enough flexibility, as long as they live within their budget, to make the lodge a real home rather than an institution in which people are incarcerated.

I want to briefly mention another senior citizens' lodge, which is working on an activity space. Some lodges were built a few years ago without much activity space. The senior citizens at the Winfield Lodge requested additional activity space from the Department of Housing. Unfortu nately, their request came at a time of budgetary restraint. The social club decided they would raise the funds for the addition themselves, and they have. Maybe it was a fortunate "unfortunately", because there is community involvement in that lodge as there has never been before.

Alberta Housing gave permission to build a recreational area addition and did the design for them. I believe they signed a contract with Alberta Housing yesterday to build the recreational space and turned over $51,000 which they had raised locally and through recreation grants from the Department of Rec reation and Parks. Needless to say, the residents and the community are extremely proud of what they've been able to achieve by working together for themselves and in co operation with Alberta Housing. Mr. Speaker, I've delib erately not dwelt on private lodges, which of course are profit-oriented.

I believe that part of the recommendation which requests the government to consider the establishment of an ongoing senior citizen housing review committee should also have the ability to address concerns raised by residents of this type of facility. In fact, the Senior Citizens' Advisory Council says: The Council further recommends that standards be established for the lodge program and that lodges be licensed by an appropriate body and regularly inspected by that body. This might be well worth thinking about. There are some real problems in attitude.

I know of one lodge where the house rule is that staff must not talk to residents. This certainly makes it difficult for the staff, and it must leave the residents feeling very cool and neglected. In another senior citizens' lodge an elderly fellow was severely scolded by a staff member for an accident which certainly wasn't intentional. The senior citizen was embarrassed enough without the scolding. It was a major bingo night, and the daughter of one of the other residents was sitting nearby when he finally got out of the limelight.

She said he turned to her with pain-filled eyes and said: "I've got to get out of this place permanently. They hate me." Two days later he was gone permanently — deceased. In this Reader's Digest

article on how to choose a senior citizens' home, it says: Staff attitudes toward residents are a sure guide to the suitability of a home. Be wary if you hear a staff member say to a man who's four times his age, "Come on, Tom, be a good boy." I believe the fundamental senior citizens' lodge program in the province of Alberta is excellent. But I believe it's imperative that we take a look at the role of the foundations, boards, matrons, and staff in providing a home for the senior citizens. I recently read a quote where one admin istrator indicated that they ran their lodge like a hotel.

The province of Alberta is not in the business of building hotels; we are building senior citizens' homes. Recently a senior citizen asked my advice about a personal problem. I indicated that I simply could not give advice in such a situation, because it was neither my place nor in the senior's best interest for me to make a judgmental decision which the senior would have to act upon. I received the laughing reply from the senior citizen: "Well, a nudge is as good as a push to a blind horse." So she really didn't want my total advice; she just wanted a little nudge.

Another meaning that could be taken from the above quote is that senior citizens do not want to be forced into doing things, be they activities, decisions, or major moves. In many cases, given time and a nudge, they'll come to their own conclusion in due course. There is really no need to push. Senior citizens are as different in their senior years as they were through the decades before. Some seniors have always made decisions and still want to be involved in decision-making, even though physically they may not be totally able to care for themselves or to carry out the decisions.

Others have made decisions all their lives and have absolutely no intention of ever making another one. Then there is another group of senior citizens who've never made decisions and don't intend to start now. In each of these cases, the senior citizens' lodge as a home should provide enough scope to allow each and every senior citizen to function without feeling threatened or pressured. A senior citizens' social club within the lodge allows all seniors to be either involved in the decisions or not, as they choose.

It's important that the philosophy of the senior citizens' lodges and nursing homes be such that not only the physical comforts be provided but also the emotional, intellectual, and mental needs be considered. Senior citizens' lodges must not be a time out between life and death but can be a continuation of life in a new. relaxed atmosphere which encourages initiative, productivity, hobbies, or just restful

April 16, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 407 coexistence with the rest of the world if that's what they desire. Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to support this motion and to think carefully about the changing needs of the senior citizens who reside in this province. I've got some pictures here, taken at the Shangri-La bazaar, and I'll pass them around while the motion is going on. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Mr. Deputy Speaker in the Chair] MRS. FYFE: Mr.

Speaker, I would like first to thank the Member for Drayton Valley for bringing forward this motion on a review committee to take a look at our housing policies related to senior citizens, particularly the lodge program. I'd like to compliment her sensitivity in this area, which I think is extremely important. I also would like to com pliment the minister responsible for housing for his concern and sensitivity in the area of senior citizens.

I know he's done a tremendous amount of work, is extremely interested personally, has demonstrated a great deal of interest in the whole area, and has plans to improve what is already a first-rate program in the province. For that, congratulations. I can say that I am familiar with the lodge program only through those within the constituency I represent. Like the Minister of Economic Development, who sometimes says he's not inhibited or burdened by additional facts, I would say that my knowledge comes more from personal experi ence, and I address my remarks this afternoon from that knowledge base.

I would also like to pay tribute to the volunteers who work within the lodge program on the boards of management, who become very much emotionally and socially involved with the seniors within the lodges in their jurisdictions. These people I have met contribute a great deal of time to the lodge program and to the seniors within it.

I know the families that have seniors in the lodges appreciate it, but I think it's worthy to add to the words of the Member for Drayton Valley our words of tribute in the Legislature to that vast volunteer force that carries out the work that is so important to the seniors within our lodge program. As the Member for Drayton Valley said so well, the lodge should be a home. It should be a place of joy. It shouldn't be a place in which the resident feels imprisoned or lacks freedom. One of the benefits of the lodge program is that even though the room may be small, it provides privacy to the individual.

I think one of the deepest concerns I have for our nursing home program is that many seniors who are independent people that have contributed to our society end their last years in a room having to share with a total stranger. It's often very difficult as a young person to share with someone you don't know, and I think it becomes even more difficult as you get older, having to share a small space with another person that is not your spouse.

I think the lodge program, because it is a recent program, has been able to accommodate seniors in a positive atmosphere that provides and respects the privacy I think is very important to each of us as human beings. One of the very important factors in locating a lodge is the actual physical location. Too many younger people tend to think that because you're a senior citizen, you want tranquillity, a place that could be termed "the shady mead ows", a place where you can get away from life, a place where you can have quiet and respite from the active world.

From all the seniors I talk to, this is totally and completely false. About the last thing most seniors want is to be away from life. In fact, the closer they can be to an area such as a school ground or day care centre or family facilities, the better it is. If they have access within walking distance to commercial facilities, a drugstore, post office, meat market, bake shop — all these things where they can go and pick up little things as they have done their entire lives — it means the continuation of a life-style that is simply part of them.

So it is extremely important that the location of a facility within each community recognizes that seniors want to be part of life, the same as they have always been. Because they have reached the magic age of 65. 70. or 75, they don't turn into another creature; they're the same person they always were. The vast majority of them still want to feel that they can make a meaningful contribution to life, even though it may be in a slightly different way.

The old saying goes that you're as old as you feel, and many feel much younger if they know they are still treated as active and valuable members of our society and our community. Before I deal directly with the motion and the committee, I would like to comment briefly on some of the structure that is already in place to assist the lodge program. The Alberta Health Facilities Review Committee has played an extremely important role in assisting lodge personnel and boards of administration to review the types of food services and the kinds of facilities in operation within the lodges.

This is a very important function that goes about quietly without much fanfare, and that's the way it should be. It continues to operate and play a very good, very important role, and that should continue. Whether a committee such as the housing review com mittee could work as an adjunct with the Alberta Health Facilities Review Committee is one potential of the model I think we should consider. I don't know whether it's necessary to establish an independent committee or whether there are a lot of resources on the Alberta Health Facilities Review Committee that could contribute in resources and knowledge.

I think that's one aspect that should be looked at before any final decision is made. The health units obviously play an extremely important function in the lodge program in assisting individuals with their personal hygiene and health concerns. In speaking this morning at the largest lodge within the constituency I represent, I asked about the question of medication, for example, and how this is handled.

I understand that a variety of systems have been tried and that in order to get around the question of liability in the dispensing of medications, the health units have been extremely successful in setting up a system which allows the public health nurse to put the medication required by the individual resident into dosettes or individual containers. These can be dispensed by the staff, and it is working exceptionally well.

I think it's important that we recognize the extremely important role that the health units, in particular the home care program, play in supporting seniors in the lodge program, which keeps these individuals in their own rooms and in these facilities for a longer period of time and, I believe, keeps them more active and also part of the community as a whole. One of the areas that I believe is extremely important for a housing review committee to consider is the education of the matron or administrator — whatever you want to call the person who's in charge of the facility.

Currently the administrator or matron is an employee of the local foundation, and that's good. That's something that should

408 ALBERTA HANSARD April 16, 1985 be continued. I recognize that the senior citizens' housing association is working at establishing some standards or criteria of qualifications for matrons. I think that establishing some guidelines is an important area in which the government could assist. I certainly don't think it's necessary to have a four-year university degree in social sciences to be a matron.

I think it's far more important that the administrator or matron be a person who has personal skills such as sensitivity, a person who can demonstrate caring and loving respect to the seniors but also treat them as equals and adults and persons that deserve their respect. It takes a special kind of person to continue to be patient day after day and listen to the small concerns that do become large if they're not dealt with.

It takes a special person, and it takes one that should have, if not formal training, at least some degree of support through informal training classes on an ongoing basis — a type of training that upgrades the personal qualifications and assists those people that have the personal qualities to become able to deal with some of the problems they must deal with on an individual, day-to-day basis. I think this is a most important area that the committee should address as one of its top criteria, because some of the stories and incidents the Member for Drayton Valley enunciated do not need to happen.

Some of the horror stories that have perhaps taken place in the odd location are simply not acceptable. By establishing some type of upgrading or training, I think we could develop a calibre of administrator or matron that would be far above those kinds of incidents. One of the other areas I'm concerned about in relation to lodges is the actual boundaries of the foundations.

The foundations were established in order that more than one municipality, at least outside the two major centres, are able to combine resources and that the deficits are costed out on the basis of an equalized assessment of the partic ipating municipalities. I believe this is something that should be flexible. We should consider the fact that those boundaries may not be as relevant now as they were when they were originally established.

Those communities that have the benefit through the equalized assessment need to ensure that all decisions that affect their neighbouring municipalities are made on what is completely realistic, rather than another municipality picking up a greater share of the deficit. I would very much like to see a review of some of the boundaries of the foundations for lodges. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to say it's important that this committee be very concerned about the question of local autonomy.

My personal belief is that it's most important that we not be seen as coming in and trying to usurp the very good work or take credit for any of the work that has been done at the local level by the volunteers, by the staff and, more importantly, by the families. This is something we must respect. I think this motion should be passed, and it should be passed in the spirit that we wish to provide support for a first-rate program and that there are specific areas which senior government can assist the local communities or the local foundations to improve.

One of the specific areas I believe it's important to deal with relates to what happens within the lodge programs themselves. A lodge that docs not have a specific activity program probably docs not have seniors who feel that the lodge is really their home. For example, the recreation area that's required within a lodge should be a place to meet, to eat, and to greet family and friends.

It is extremely important that families always feel they have a responsibility for the senior members in their family, that they don't feel that simply by placing the senior member in a lodge they can abdicate the responsibility to communicate with and to love and care for those family members. A place that is active and brings the family members in for lodge dances, for example, or lodge programs that have a community orientation, are extremely beneficial to the seniors them selves. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to conclude by saying I believe this is an extremely worthwhile motion that the Member for Drayton Valley has brought forward. I once again commend her for thinking about the lodge program and being concerned about the needs of the program. In my opinion, this program is essential and worth while. It's an excellent program, but like all programs it needs our support and concern. Excellent programs can still be made even more excellent, and; with that, Mr. Speaker, I conclude. MR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in this debate brought to the Assembly by the hon.

Member for Drayton Valley. It has been said that as we get older our bodies get shorter and our anecdotes longer. Well, I must assure members of the House that I will keep my remarks brief this afternoon. I wish to look at one major issue: the implications of our changing demographic structure upon senior citizens in general and more specifically on senior citizens' housing policies. It goes without saying that the number of elderly persons in Canada and Alberta will grow substantially before the end of the century. In Alberta in 1984 there were approximately 180,000 Albertans 65 years of age and over.

This represents some 7.6 percent of Alberta's population. Another way of looking at these figures, Mr. Speaker: the number of Albertans 65 years and over represents the populations of Lethbridge, Red Deer, Medicine Hat, and Fort McMurray combined. When viewed in this way, there is no question that they represent quite a large total of the population of Alberta. In the next quarter century, however, the number of senior citizens in Alberta will double, and I might add that most of us at this debate today will be part of that group — might I add, hopefully be part of that group.

Projections to the year 2026 estimate that there will be over 700,000 seniors in Alberta — more than the present population of Calgary or Edmonton. Studies and projections indicate that seniors not only are living longer but also are healthier, wealthier, and better educated than their predecessors. These demographic changes will place new demands on senior citizens' housing, and there is a need to evaluate present programs with a view to future needs and possible alter natives. However, in our evaluation and reviews it is vital that senior citizens have continual input into housing policies.

Seniors are very important information resources regarding housing, for they are the users and are directly affected by choices we as politicians may make. One of the important features in seniors' housing is the availability of choice. Seniors, like the rest of the population, are mixed groups with a variety of service needs and housing preferences. Alternatives should be provided to give them greater choice in their living arrangements.

The Department of Housing, along with other departments, should examine means whereby a wide variety of housing alternatives with a range of choices from independent living to institution alization can be made available. Mr. Speaker, there is already a good deal of input from the Provincial Senior

April 16, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 409 Citizens' Advisory Council and Senior Citizens Bureau on senior citizens' housing policy in this province. The resolution before us asks that we "undertake a review of government senior citizens' housing policies and principles." No doubt such a review would include a review of the present housing programs in Alberta. I believe the present housing programs for senior citizens in Alberta are some of the most progressive in North America. I'd like to look at just a few of them. First of all, the senior citizens' self-contained program: a super program, Mr.

Speaker, providing hundreds of senior Albertans who are mentally and physically self-sufficient rented bachelor and one-bedroom apartments in complexes built under this program. Some complexes also provide suites that are modified for the disabled. In Edmonton Kingsway the self-contained units are tremendous. They're well kept, they're clean, and they provide an extremely positive environment. In reviewing the orientation booklet for management agency board members produced by Alberta Housing, extensive guidelines and policies are stressed, Mr. Speaker.

Evaluation procedures are stressed, and roles of housing manager, maintenance staff, and others are under scored. But I believe a review of this program would be beneficial. Why? To obtain positive and negative feedback from seniors, managers, and board members. A second program that has been alluded to by both the previous speakers is the senior citizens' lodge program. Mr. Speaker, I think it's important to stress what these lodges are supposed to do. What is their objective? Why have they been provided by the provincial government? And why has there been support to lodges?

Well, lodges provide housing for seniors who are in good health but do not wish to maintain an independent household. Unit rents include meals, laundry, and housekeeping services. While medical services are not provided by the lodge, residents may obtain personal care services through local health units. Lodges also offer short-term accommodation for seniors under a vacation relief or respite care program. This program offers temporary housing alternatives for families caring for their elderly at home or for seniors needing accommodation for a limited period of time. Yes, Mr.

Speaker, the lodges are excellent in so many ways. It is a home to seniors. It is a caring place. It is not simply a building but an environment of warmth, friendliness, togetherness, and yet independence. But I believe a review of the seniors' lodge program would also be in order. Specifically, the demographic changes I alluded to earlier have drastically changed the resident component of these lodges we were referring to. Last year the Alberta Health Facilities Review Committee visited 84 of the 133 lodges in the province of Alberta.

Here are some examples of how situations have changed, and I raise these issues so that when the review occurs, they will be considered. First of all, residents are living longer, with an average age in some lodges of 85 years old or older. Many residents require more care medically, mentally, physically, and socially. In some cases lodges have become intermediate care facilities. In some lodges over 50 percent of the residents require some type of help from a home care group, lodge staff, or others. This help I am referring to, Mr. Speaker, includes medication, bathing, oxygen, walkers, wheelchairs, et cetera.

There is a growing percentage that require nursing- home level care. With these changes I have just referred to occurring in our aging population, I ask the question: should there be more of a dovetailing between Alberta Housing and the Department of Hospitals and Medical Care with respect to lodges? I ask the question: could lodges that have low occupancy rates open a wing of those buildings and offer intermediate care, a step before nursing home care, to citizens that require it?

I ask the question: should there be any thought of removing the lodge program from the purview of the Alberta Health Facilities Review Committee? I will answer that question, Mr. Speaker. I think not; in fact, I stress that it must not. Mr. Speaker, other senior programs I'd like to refer to include, of course, the seniors' home improvement program. Here is a cost of over $140 million that has assisted over 50,000 senior citizens to improve and maintain their resi dences. Another program deals with special home heating grants for 85,000 seniors living in their own homes.

This rebate has been extended to the end of 1987 at an estimated cost of $25 million. Alberta has the most extensive housing programs in Canada. A major priority of this government is to provide suitable housing in the immediate surroundings of senior citizens, close to services, family, and communities that they have been a part of during their entire lives. A wide range of housing options exists in Alberta. Briefly again, programs have been established to help seniors remain in their homes. Self-contained apartments are provided where no care is required.

Lodges exist for those who need a minimal level of assistance in daily tasks, and nursing homes are available to those requiring further assistance. But there are gaps in the continuum, and those gaps must be filled. This motion is two-pronged. It suggests "a review of government senior citizens' housing policies and principles." I am heartily in favour of such a review due to the demographic changes I've enunciated. It is time to truly look at all accommodation for seniors now and to begin planning more fruitfully for the future growth in our aging population.

I welcome this review and suggest that, no question, a mechanism be established as soon as possible to deal with this issue. The motion also suggests the need for an "ongoing senior citizen housing review committee." The term "ongo ing" implies another bureaucracy. It implies more funds to be expended. I just cannot support this component of the motion. I don't believe we require the ongoing committee in view of the fact that many are presently knowledgeable of what is occurring in housing for seniors. Who are they?

The Minister and the Department of Housing; the Minister and the Department of Social Services and Community Health; the Minister and the Department of Hospitals and Medical Care; the Senior Citizens' Advisory Council; many, many private organizations, societies, and associations deal ing with seniors; and the Alberta Health Facilities Review Committee. Speaking of the Alberta Health Facilities Review Com mittee, I am proud to say I am one of its members.

I give praise to the 10 public members of the committee who have shown such extensive dedication in attempting to make our facilities a better environment for all citizens. My con gratulations, too, go to the chairman, the hon. Member for Calgary Currie, for his leadership and his continued support for all members in fulfilling their role. Mr. Speaker, the committee recently submitted the 1983 annual report to this House and made a number of rec ommendations directly related to this motion.

I believe it is important to read these recommendations into the record, because they cover much of what has been indicated by the Member for Drayton Valley. First of all, recommendation 2 dealt with multicare facilities:

410 ALBERTA HANSARD April 16, 1985 For the unfortunate people whose deteriorating health forces them to relinquish the independence of main taining their own homes, life can become a series of leave-takings — from home to lodge, from lodge to nursing home, from nursing home to auxiliary hospital. To case the stress of leaving friends and familiar surroundings, consideration should be given to providing multi-level facilities to accommodate different levels of care. Mr. Speaker, I believe it is time this recommendation be dealt with. It is not a new one; it has been on the books for a number of years.

I hope this Assembly will deal with it at some time in the near future. There are many recommendations in the 1983 annual report with respect to senior citizens' lodges. I will simply touch upon some of them, keeping in mind that in most lodges the accommodation, the people, and the care are excellent. However, some changes and recommendations are provided, dealing first of all with home care: Home Care provides a valuable service to lodges and we applaud this, but we believe that it is time for the Government to review the whole concept of lodges.

This would require the joint discussions of the Minister of Housing, the Minister of Social Services and Com munity Health, and the Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care. The second recommendation deals with training: The staff of most lodges are doing an excellent job in providing comfortable and happy homes for the residents, but they should have help. Training courses for matrons, cooks and maintenance staff would encour age them and help them with problems. Many receive no training and are left to work things out [on their own].

In a number of cases this results in complaints about food, complaints about maintenance, and com plaints about lack of recreational activities. A procedures manual for matrons would also be helpful for their guidance and reference. This should include sections on human relations, supervisory skills, budgeting, nutrition, maintenance, and information on services available to lodges and [other] residents. Mr. Speaker, the final recommendation deals with medi cation: Matrons sometimes undertake the responsibility for giving residents their medications.

It would be advisable to have Home Care nurses and pharmacists set up a proper dispensing procedure for residents requiring assistance. In closing, Mr. Speaker, a review of housing policies and principles for seniors — yes, and now. However, in my estimation an ongoing committee is definitely not required. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. DR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I'm very interested in the issue raised by Motion 205, brought before the Assembly by our colleague the Member for Drayton Valley. It is interesting to analyze the motion and see that it is, indeed, in two parts. The first

part is readily of a positive nature in terms of the fact that any government should keep the matter of its ongoing programs in all areas under constant review, and especially keep in review and analyze the underlying principles with respect to various programs. Senior citizen housing is, indeed, a very important program, and as has been mentioned by other speakers, the programs in place in the province of Alberta really rank first among the programs available throughout this country.

I know the minister responsible and his department have a great deal of sensitivity and concern with respect to the various facilities for senior citizens which fall within the ambit of the department. I for one would like to compliment the minister in particular and the people within his department for their ongoing concern in this area, bearing in mind, of course, that senior citizen housing is but one of a number of aspects in that complete department. The second matter within the motion is the consideration of the establishment of an ongoing senior citizen housing review committee.

As I look at the wording of the motion, I see it in a far broader context than the proposer of the motion. As I listened to my hon. colleague's comments, she seemed to focus more in the area of senior citizens' lodge accommodation and then went on from there with respect to nursing home accommodation. In terms of my comments I see the establishment of an ongoing senior citizen housing review committee as having far broader parameters, and I speak in favour of the establishment of such a committee.

Before I go on to my comments, I too would like to pay a full compliment to the Health Facilities Review Committee, under the chairmanship of our colleague from Calgary Currie and our colleague from Edmonton Kingsway, who has membership on that committee. Together with the other members of that committee, they carry on a very vital function, a very necessary and useful function, as they go and visit the various facilities. I think there are approx imately 360 facilities throughout the province in the total ambit of their committee.

Members of the Assembly should be very cognizant of the fact that when that committee goes out to visit, it indeed visits in depth. When they're dealing with lodges and especially with nursing homes and active treatment hospitals, they spend a considerable amount of time there. I know that in the case of hospitals they often spend two or three days trying to go through the community, if you will, of a hospital, because our hospitals are often larger than some of the residential communities throughout the province of Alberta.

One needs to bear in mind that the thrust of that committee, while it has a fairly broad spectrum, indeed does cover a narrower focus in terms of senior citizen accommodation than what is really embraced within the total ambit of the Department of Housing with respect to the other types of facilities for senior citizens. For a few moments I would like to talk with respect to some of the experience I've had working with senior citizen accommodation over the last 12 to 14 years. The comments primarily relate to the area of self-contained senior citizen units.

In the last decade there has been tremendous explosive growth in the province in this area, particularly in the last seven years. The majority of the concentration of construction of these units has taken place within the major urban centres, particularly in Calgary and Edmonton. Nevertheless, the broad thrust of the program has enabled smaller communities to have smaller residential accommo dation facilities put in place so that we now have self- contained units for senior citizens in almost every community throughout the province of Alberta.

That immediately puts a fair amount of pressure upon volunteer organizations and individual volunteers in the communities throughout the province. I believe the record to date has been really quite commendable. But I think that in terms of the wear and tear on volunteer organizations — for example, I know that some groups within the city of Calgary are now experiencing some type of depression. Having gone through the initial exhilaration and all the hard

April 16, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 411 work of planning for a senior citizens' self-contained housing project, all the agony and anxiety that's involved, the expenditure of person-hours in terms of the development and everything, trying to work out what the plumbing system really ought to be, the amenity areas, the colour of the interior, and the other important factors such as special hardware for handicapped persons as well as for aged persons — once you've gone through that initial burst of energy, there is indeed a letdown when it comes to the so-called ho-hum everyday operation of the facilities.

As we all know, those ho-hum days are really the essence of the ongoing provision of a communitylike, familylike atmosphere in caring for the everyday needs of the individuals who live within those facilities. Being a member of a nonprofit group, Trinity Place Foundation of Alberta, over the last 12 years, I have seen the inevitable wear and tear that can happen to a board. For example, as past chairman and an ongoing director of that board, we consciously look to a changeover within the members of the board. You do it on a long-range basis.

You phase out one member out of 10 about every year or two years so that you're bringing in new people, but you're also allowing some of your members who have been with you for a long haul to finally have a rest. So it is that at least one of our board members, Sister Jean Golden, who was so essential to the construction of our initial project, Carter Place, now lives in a facility which is located in Canmore but still comes into Calgary and works with us in terms of the three facilities which we now operate, Carter Place, Murdoch Manor, and King Tower.

We have con sciously gone to younger board members so that we are able to stretch out the learning curve and the experience, and after some of the rest of us start living in some of these senior citizen facilities, we in turn have really been bringing along and developing other people who will be able to carry on. As a conscious policy with the development of Trinity Place Foundation of Alberta, we have indeed been looking not just at the immediate needs, as important as they are, but at long-range planning.

At the moment I believe that as a board we already have in place sufficient experienced person-power to be able to handle those facilities over the next 20 years. That is a very conscious decision which is a very important philosophy that needs to be put in place by various other groups throughout the province. I know that some others have indeed taken that kind of philosophy into consideration in the development of their facilities.

One of the reasons I'm in favour of this motion and the establishment of a review committee is that such a board not only would take into consideration senior citizen lodges and nursing homes, which are presently covered by the Health Facilities Review Committee, but would take on this tremendous number of self-contained units within the prov ince. That's a huge number of units where we really do not have direct access, and we certainly do not have any access to that through the present legislation covering the Health Facilities Review Committee.

I make the brief comment that one of the real needs in the province is for the development of more nursing homes. Whether that might be done through the private sector or some other way is a moot point for discussion. I think that's the area where we are yet to see the crunch in terms of what's happening in the aging process of the residents within the facilities. As the sponsor of the motion has put forward, this is a real concern. For example, in January 1977 we moved the first residents into Carter Place in downtown Calgary, and we have 180 units.

It is a constant source of concern to me that every time I go into that facility — and I probably go at least once every 10 days on an irregular pattern of hours, early and late — the thing that keeps striking me is the aging process which has taken place. Some of our original residents are there, but they are much frailer with the passage of just seven years. By the same token, they look at me and realize that I've aged considerably during the same length of time.

In the course of the last number of months — last September as a matter of fact — Trinity Place Foundation of Alberta was privileged to take on the challenge of Murdoch Manor, with 360 senior self-contained housing units, and King Tower, which has an additional 143 units. So in total we are now grappling with the challenges of 683 units of self-contained housing. Mr.

Speaker, I hope the minister will forgive me if I make mention of the fact that we've had some additional challenges involved, but I think he realized that those challenges were there in terms of the physical difficulties of taking on Murdoch Manor and King Tower, which previously had been administered by the Calgary housing authority.

First, one needs to point out that because the previous program was so good and we built more and more projects of self-contained housing for seniors within the city of Calgary, once we came into a downturn in the economic cycle, we inevitably had more of the seniors from the downtown core who were living in some of the original buildings moving out to be closer to their relatives — and that made sense — or because some of the new facilities had better amenity space or more space in which to live because of the three projects administered by our nonprofit foundation.

In effect, we have a tremendous number of smaller bed-sitter accommodations. When you stop to think of it, the majority of us here in the Assembly are accustomed to living in a fairly large home of reasonable size, having more than one bedroom. But if you suddenly become an MLA, move to Edmonton, and get yourself into a bed-sitter situation, you don't have a bedroom, which has happened to me. I'm learning to live in a smaller and smaller space.

Inevitably, the smallest space you're going to have to deal with is your casket. [interjections] That's what's known as a very positive approach, but I assure my colleagues that it's also a very realistic approach, unless the rest of you have found a way that you're going to live forever. One thing we encountered with Murdoch Manor and King Tower was unexpected operational difficulties. For example, we are now dealing with replacing the roof of Murdoch Manor, which is costing $120,000. During the break last week I was up on top of that roof, together with two other members of our board.

It's an interesting situation to see the city of Calgary from the top of that senior citizens' high rise. It was also interesting to suddenly look to the west and see a commercial helicopter picking up a dinosaur and flying it from the zoo into the new park area that's been developed. AN HON. MEMBER: No pink elephants? DR. CARTER: No pink elephants. This actually happened. With respect to King Tower, for example, we suddenly discovered that in the construction of that project, which took place in '77 or '78, the workmen had left a few odd things in the sewer.

So suddenly we had to rip out the whole ground floor main lobby in order to effect sewer

412 ALBERTA HANSARD April 16, 1985 repairs. In Murdoch Manor we discovered why they were having trouble with heat controls in the whole south

section of the building. None of the thermostats had been hooked up, even though the building has been open for 12 years. In addition, with respect to King Tower, the seniors living on the top floors had complained about the heat buildup in the summertime, yet the building was set up to have proper air ventilation and so forth. When we moved in, we dis covered that the previous group occupying the south tower of King Tower had blocked off all the cooling system to the senior citizens but were making sure that the cooling was going down to the operation of their offices on the ground floor.

My board members and I really don't think that was exactly the way to run the facility. These examples are there — and I could give many more with all three facilities — to say that while we have a number of voluntary groups out there and while the department tries to keep in meaningful contact with the groups, nevertheless there's a need from the construction side, the physical plant side, for people to be able to go in and compare various projects throughout the province and make positive suggestions about how you can change and deal with the physical, structural difficulties.

In addition to that, it's a matter of attitudinal concept. It's a matter of dealing with senior citizens. We're talking about self-worth, about self-reliance, and about dignity. Let's face it; the people who are within the self-contained housing units have more experience than many of us in terms of a lifetime, the various jobs they have done, the various projects they have been able to accomplish, and the various talents they still possess. Many of them just want to be asked for their help. They certainly want to be asked in terms of their input.

But attitudinally, in terms of a board's relationship with the people who are managing the facility, I still believe your frontline people are the ones who determine the atmos phere within the facility. In the case of senior citizens' self- containeds, in our experience we find that when it comes to the hiring process the number one people have to be the caretaking staff. It's part and parcel of the caretaker's job that when a senior citizen resident goes by and says hello and wants to spend a few minutes visiting, you stop cleaning the floor and carry on with the visit.

What's involved here is a matter of interpersonal relationships. It's a matter of communication and of self-worth, because many, many people do not have relatives, or very few friends, and to be able to feel that the caretaking staff, the recep tionist, the executive director, or the board members who move in and out of the facility will at least stop and say hello is an acknowledgment of the fact that "Hey, I still exist, and I am still a person of self-worth." That's a factor which applies to all types of senior citizen housing, but it's something that all of us need to bear in mind.

In terms of having an ongoing committee which would visit the whole spectrum of senior citizens' facilities through out the province, one would have to select a committee that would have that kind of sensitivity, so when they walked into a facility, they would indeed meet with all the staff, the board members, and the residents. It doesn't take you very many minutes before you can determine, get a feel for the atmosphere within a facility, as to whether it's being run in a too dictatorial fashion or there's any kind of input at all from the residents as to what's happening in their home.

Remember too that the quality of life within those senior citizen homes is very much under observation and very much commented upon by the general public. You have delivery people moving into a building. They can pick up a sense of whether that facility is really working with the residents and catering to the needs of the people for whom the place was supposedly built. By the same token, we also have relatives and friends, the children and grandchildren who come to visit grandma or grandpa.

They also can very quickly pick up on whether or not you have a facility which is run with a great deal of sensitivity or one which is just another type of senior citizens' warehousing. One of the other concepts which should be examined with respect to these facilities is the matter of that flow of other people coming in. I don't know if the minister would be open to the thought, Mr. Speaker, but there's an open area in one of the three facilities we administer which has not yet been picked up for other use.

One of the things I would like to see considered there is a day care facility with a lot of the workers being on a rotational basis, some of the residents, some of the senior citizens. A lot of young children fail to have much contact with older people, often because of the mobility of our society, because we move all over the country and your grandchildren may not be raised in the same city as your children. It would perhaps help the youngsters to have more of an appreciation of older folks.

It certainly would bring to the situation the appreciation the older folks have for young children, but only on a limited basis so you don't need to put up with them all the time. Another thing would be that some male senior citizens might also be able to put in more time working in that kind of day care. As I've travelled throughout the province with other facilities and come into day cares, it's interesting to note how many young children, male and female, come running to me because I'm a male figure.

So much of their life really doesn't have a man in it because we have such a predominance of single-parent families using the day cares. I just use this as an example of the kind of overlapping that can take place, that different kinds of people should be able to move in and out of our senior citizens' facilities. We haven't built them as ghettos but as places of human interaction. For example, one of our facilities, Carter Place, has the police department on the ground floor, and it's interesting to watch the kind of banter which takes place between the policemen and the seniors.

There's a whole kind of watchfulness, an observation process which takes place because you've got other age groups and other occu pations coming in so that you have an interchange of ideas. [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] Amenity space is something which is difficult to build in because of the cost. I think most of our facilities are to be commended for the efforts they make in terms of trying to deal with arts and crafts, whether it's woodwork, ceramics, painting, singing, or whatever, but again that becomes a matter of how the residents view their own home facility.

As has been mentioned by others, the real problem of life is that we're undergoing constant change, but when it comes to the fact that we've been retired, we have more time to think about the change. Most of us in this Assembly go at such a pace and have so many things to do that sometimes we don't have sufficient time to think about some of the things; for sure, we don't have time to brood about them. That's one of the very important differences between still being employed and the time of retirement, when you have more time to think about what is happening, more

April 16, 1985 ALBERTA HANSARD 413 time to brood about it, and you feel less in charge of what is happening to your life. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to give evidence of a new use for a senior citizens' facility, which I should have thought about before because of one of my occupations — there are more than one. About two months ago I conducted a funeral in the Lynnwood facility here in Edmonton. The person who died had been a resident in that facility for about two years and was the father of a close friend of mine.

The service was conducted in the facility, not at a strange church, not at a strange funeral home, not at a place where all the residents of the facility would have to go a number of miles to find the funeral. At the wish of his family, his funeral service took place in the midst of his second family, those people who had come to love and appreciate him and deal with his medical disabilities in the last two years of his life.

I found that in essence that was a very good example of what we're really trying to create in these various facilities throughout the province: meaningful communities where people care about each other, even at the time of death. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. APPLEBY: Mr. Speaker, as a member of that elite group of three people who are members of this Assembly and who belong to the subject under discussion this after noon, I thought it might be appropriate if I made just a few comments. I do so for several reasons, Mr. Speaker. One is that in your present position, you yourself are restricted from doing so.

The other is that I can claim a chronological seniority over the hon. Member for Chinook. But there's another reason that I think would be interesting to members of this Assembly, Mr. Speaker. About the mid- 50s the program for senior citizens' lodges in this province was implemented by the then member for a place called Pembina, which included parts of the present Athabasca constituency. The member at that time was the hon. Bob Jorgenson, and he was the minister of health and welfare in those days.

He represented, as I said, a constituency called Pembina, and at that time that included part of the present Barrhead constituency and also included the town of Westlock. I mention the town of Westlock because it was there — and I'm sure the hon. Member for Clover Bar will recall — that in the mid-50s a special ceremony was held to open 25 newly constructed lodges in this province. A radio network was set up in Pembina Lodge at Westlock. The hon. Bob Jorgenson was present along with Premier Manning, and they did the official opening for all the lodges.

Of course, in all the local communities represented in the other 24 centres, there were MLAs and local members of government and various special people who took

part in those ceremonies. About five years ago, Mr. Speaker, in the town of Westlock, I was fortunate to be able to take

part in the 25th anniversary of this special opening of the lodges here in the province of Alberta. It was interesting that at that time the hon. Bob Jorgenson was a guest in Pembina Lodge in Westlock. He was present for that 25th anniversary ceremony, as were the hon. Harry Strom and the hon. Alf Hooke, who had been members of the former government at the time the special ceremony was held 25 years before. It was quite a momentous occasion, I can assure you. I think that what I've listened to this afternoon, Mr.

Speaker, certainly pinpoints some of the things that have to be looked at as far as lodges are concerned. Before I was an MLA, I was at one time a member of the board of Pleasant Valley Lodge in [Athabasca]. I cannot help but note how great the changes have been, because at that time we agonized many times for a long period as to who we would admit to the lodge. We set up a screening formula and a method of rating people so that we could take whoever we thought had the most right to be in the lodge, because we always had a waiting list. That has changed.

I now have lodges in my constituency that are running way under capacity. Members this afternoon have pinpointed some of the reasons for that, and certainly the self-contained units, the home care program, and the homemaker's program have all contributed to that. These programs are good, but it shows that we are changing what we need to do in the way of looking at this type of care in the province. I think some of the comments, recommendations, and suggestions are very worth while. I congratulate the hon.

Member for Drayton Valley and all the members who have participated, and thank the hon. member who stood aside for a few moments to let me speak. Thank you. DR. BUCK: It's all right, Dick. You don't have to stand up when I make a speech. Mr. Speaker. I would like to get in the debate very briefly this afternoon and say that I certainly support the intent of the resolution. But I have to agree with the hon. Member for Edmonton Kingsway that we have departments set up to look after the facilities we establish, we have local boards, and we have the senior citizens' groups that look after their own facilities.

So I think it would be a make-work program if we were to go ahead and have an ongoing review committee. Now, I realize there are a lot of Tory backbenchers that need a little extra income and a little extra work for the rest of the year. I say that rather facetiously, because I know the hon. member who proposed the resolution didn't have any ulterior motive. I wish to compliment the government on the continuation of the program that was established in the '50s by the previous government, as the hon.

Member for Athabasca mentioned, and I support wholeheartedy the fact that in this province we probably have the best facilities for our senior citizens of any in the world. I have seen some in other countries, and we don't take a backseat to any other country in the world. I want to say that there was something that bothered me when we first started centralizing some of these facilities; that is, people were going from their own community into larger communities.

Because we're in such close proximity to the city of Edmonton, I know of many cases where people from, say, Bruderheim, Fort Saskatchewan, Stony Plain, Leduc, St. Albert — because their families lived in the city, a lot of these senior citizens in their later years would move to the city to be close to their families. They found that that was a devastating mistake. Now that young families are so mobile, you may move from Fort Saskatch ewan to Edmonton to be with your family, and four months later the family moves to Toronto.

So I think we have learned something, and I compliment the government for the foresight to have the small, self-contained units through out the province. I think that was an excellent move. It was well thought out and very, very important. Because we are finding out, as the hon. Member for Athabasca said, that you want your retirement years where you and your friends grew up all those years, in these small communities. That's where you can go and watch them curl, Mr. Minister

414 ALBERTA HANSARD April 16, 1985 of Health, or even curl. Or you can watch them golf or even play golf. You know, that keeps us healthy. MR. COOK: You're sensitive about this, Walt. DR. BUCK: We have recognized that this was a problem, and we've reversed that to have small, self-contained units. I sincerely compliment the government. The hon. member from Calgary mentioned the fact that the people in these lodges and self-contained units become second families.

We know, of course, that there are always a few petty problems in some of the facilities, but as long as you put in different people from different walks of life, you're going to have a few disagreements. But we also have to remember that there are medical reasons for some of these people not getting along too well. As we get medical conditions like hardening of the arteries, atheros clerosis, we see personality changes. People who have had small strokes are not like they were many years ago. Some of them become very cantankerous; some of them lose their memory.

So we have personality changes, and we have to recognize these. I want to close by once again complimenting the government, Mr. Speaker, because we have invested the taxpayers' dollars wisely in establishing so many of these facilities across the province. We as younger members of this Assembly, compared to the senior citizens in many of these places, have to make sure, as someone mentioned, that we don't make these dumping grounds for our senior citizens. Too many times as MLAs we've experienced the condition where some of these people never have relatives visit them for months on end.

When our parents move into some of these facilities, and hopefully some of us will be moving in, we hope our relatives and friends will remember that. Also, in the selection of sites, I know at one time the philosophy used to be: there's a nice piece of land over there; let's put it over there; it's sort of out of the road; they'll like the peace and quiet. Peace and quiet are the last things senior citizens want. They want to be where the action is. So we have recognized and rectified that situation.

At the same time, I'd like to make a little comment on — I believe somebody has a resolution, or it's been spoken on, where we're looking at removing the mandatory age of retirement. I believe the hon. Member for Edmonton Kingsway mentioned that fact or that he is proposing a resolution, and I think that's a step, God willing, I never really want to say I am retiring from my profession, or I am retiring from something. I think those of us who are self-employed have that luxury; we can sort of semiretire. On the other hand, there are people who think retirement is the greatest thing.

If they think that's the greatest thing. I'm glad they like to go that route, but I don't think I look forward to the day when at the magic tone of midnight, when you're 65 years of age. if you're employed, you're put out to pasture. That devastates people. Some people cannot adjust to that. Some people have not had any counseling, and I know one or two cases right in my own community. This is really a tragic story, because this person had so much to contribute. We didn't realize this man was a university graduate. We thought he was the local town drunk. The man was a functioning alcoholic.

We knew he had this problem, but he seemed to be able to work at his job and show up all the time, do a decent job. But he quit his alcohol problems cold turkey because the medical doctor told him: "You have two choices. You can keep drinking and be dead in six months, or you can stop drinking and live a long time." The man quit cold turkey, and I admired him. I didn't think he had that kind of backbone, but he did. Seven years later all of a sudden he started drinking again. I phoned his daughter. I was really quite upset; I felt so badly. She said: "Yes, he has started drinking again.

You'll never guess why." I said, "No, I can't understand why." She said, "He's going to retire in 18 months, and he doesn't know what he's going to do with his retirement." It wasn't three months after that that his wife came home and found him dead from a mixture of alcohol and drugs. That's how devastating it is to some people when they can't face compulsory and arbitrary retirement. I wanted to bring those few facts to the Assembly. We can't just put people in these places; we have to remember they are still human beings.

They want the interaction of their family and their friends, and that's why it's so important that these facilities be in the small communities. Mr. Speaker, I certainly compliment the government on that program. I am enthusiastic about what the member proposes, but I'm worried that we're going to add a little more bureaucracy to the bureaucracy if we set up this ongoing review com mittee. So I support the intent, but I would have great difficulty with setting up an ongoing committee. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. MUSGROVE: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to make a few comments about motion 205 and certainly commend the Member for Drayton Valley for bringing this to our attention. As was said by the Member for Calgary Egmont, there are actually two parts to this motion, and I would like to speak to the top part of the motion first. There are two programs for senior citizens' accommodation. One is the self-contained units that have recently become the most popular senior citizens' housing, and then there are the senior citizens' lodges. Mr.

Speaker, I spent from January 1966 until November 1977 as a member of a foundation, a board member for the lodges. At the time I first became a board member, there was a 50-bed lodge in Brooks, and it had a waiting list of somewhere around 30 percent of the capacity of the lodge. After the building of the self-contained, there were a lot of changes, and there are still changes taking place in senior citizens' housing in my constituency. During the time I was on the board, several of us were also members of the hospital board.

On the building of the new hospital next door to Newbrook Lodge, the lodge had extra land. Being on both the hospital board and the senior citizens' board and also a member of the management board for self-contained units, some of us did what they call horse-trading. We traded some land that belonged to the senior citizens' lodge to the new hospital, which in turn traded six acres of excess land at the old hospital site, and that became the site for the self-contained units. On the six acres there was room for four buildings of self-contained units.

Three of those, started in 1976, are built, and the fourth went to tender early this winter and will be under construction this summer. The four villas, as we call them, on that property will have a total of 110 apartments and will be filled the day the last unit is open. We also have one self-contained unit in Bassano that has eight apartments, and in some of the smaller centres we have fourplexes th

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19850416
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L20 S3 19850416 1430 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	22b051626c29861f25763307126167137bfe82bd

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