Alberta Hansard — 13 May 2003, Afternoon sitting (13:30) (Legislature 25, Session 3)

20030513

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

May 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1615 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 1:30 p.m. Date: 2003/05/13 [The Speaker in the chair] head : Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon and welcome. Let us pray. Dear God, auth or of all wisdom, knowledge, and understanding, we ask Thy guidance in order that truth and justice may prevail in all our judgments. Amen. Please be seated. head : Introduction of G uests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Sustainable Resource Develop- ment. Mr. Cardinal: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to the members of the Assembly Agnieszka Wyka, who is employed in my office here at the Legisla- ture as a summer student. She is seated in the members’ gallery. I’d like her to rise and rece ive the tr aditional w arm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Banff-Cochrane. Mrs. Tarchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to introduce and welcome a very special and distinguished group seat ed in the Speaker’s gallery . They are ca lled the CC AF Fellow s and are participants in a nine-month international fellowship program based in Ottawa.

They are visiting us today as part of a tour of w estern Canada. The fellowship progr am i s a colla boration betw een the office of the Auditor General of Canada, the Canadian Comprehen- sive Auditing Foundation, and the Auditor General of Quebec. The program is sponsored by the Canadian International Development Agency and is designed to expand knowledge and understanding of public-sector accounting and auditing as practised in Canada to help participants address auditing issues in their home environment. Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce Mrs. Maria Guevara from Chile; Mr.

Steven LaRo cque from th e Domin ica; M r. Hewa Samarawerra from Sri Lanka; Mrs. Mukda Kaiyarit from Thailand; Ms Narjess Sellami from Tunisia; Mrs. Donna Bigelow, program co- ordinator, international affairs, office of the Auditor G eneral of Canada in Ottawa; Ms Kimberley Speek, administrative co-ordinator with CCAF in O ttawa; and Lori T rudgeon, com munications co- ordinator for the office of the Auditor General of Alberta. Again, they are sea ted in t he Speaker’s gallery, and I would as k them to please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assem- bly. Mr. Snelgrove: Mr.

Speaker, we’ve simply been invaded today by a group of w onderful young school kid s from Kitscoty, and they inform me that their teachers have offered to take them camping for three days a fter their visit he re, so sch ool isn’t like it used to be. They’re accompanied today by their teachers Mr. Kim Aitken and Mrs. Eleanor Parr and their parent helpers Mr. Wayne Cundliffe, Mr. Jason Simpson, Mr. Donald Kent, Mrs. Sharon Williams, Ms Chris Reimer, Mrs. Suzanne Hutchinson, and Mrs. Maxine Jones. I would ask the parents and the stude nts to all rise and please accept t he warm welcome of this Assembly.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-West. Ms Kryczka: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. This af ternoon I’m very pleased to introduce t o you and thr ough y ou to me mbers t wo employees of the government here in Edmonton. I would just say that basically life is certainly always full of changes, including for my colleague MLA for Vermilion-Lloydminster and myself, but I’m very pleased to introduce to you Warren Chandler, who has been our assistant in the Le gislature for t he p ast year and a hal f.

We’ve certainly enjoyed working with him, but he’s now moving to a new position with the Minister of Human Resources and Employment. I’d like to very favourably introduce Leah Ritz, our new assistant, who is a rec ent gradua te of Ca rleton Univ ersity who ma jored in marketing and minored in psychology. She has worked in the House of Commons for Stockwell Day, MP for Okanagan-Coquihalla, and I would say that there certainly is political blood running through her veins. Her father is Gerry Ritz, MP for Battlefords-Lloydminster.

I would like to invite these two young people to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for St. Albert. Mrs. O’Neill: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure to introduce to you and through you to members of this A ssembly three friends and co-workers who are seated in the members’ gallery. They are Amy and Campbell Mackenzie and Laura Harrison. They are co-workers in many ways, and I would like to ask them to stand and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. I rise today with a very special introduction. Several weeks ago a young boy in grade 2 wrote me a very nicely printed letter expressing his concern with staff losses at his school. He was concerned about the fate o f his teachers and especially of the sc hool’s librarian. I was s o impressed with the letter, I presented it to this A ssembly, and today I’m able to intro- duce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly the boy who wrote it . His nam e is Jose ph Landy, and he is in the public gallery. Would you please stand, Joseph? Thank you. With him are his parents, Francis and Bennett.

Would the rest of the family and his guests also rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and thr ough you to mem bers of the Assembly Doreen Vanderstoop. Doree n is a p arent adv ocate w ith PACE, Pare nts Advocating for Catholic Education. She’s part of the group that was here earlier this morning to present the letter of letters, and it spread from one end of t he mall to the other.

Doreen is in the public gallery, and with your permission I’d ask her to stand and receive the traditional welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I’ve got two i ntroductions today. I’m very pleased to rise and introduce to you and through you to the Assembly a strong supporter of public education who traveled up from Calgary this morning to join with other parents at 11 o’clock on the steps of the Legislature to make a statement on the underfund- ing of education in this province. She is here now in the Assembly to watch it work.

Carol Bazinet is a concerned parent and president of Calgary As sociation of Parents and School Co uncils and a

1616 Alberta Hansard May 13, 2003 longtime advocate for children and public education. I would now ask her to please rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assem- bly. Mr. Speaker, I am truly delighted to introduce two very special individuals this afternoon. They are my constituent Mike Kalisiak and his proud dad, Stan Kalisiak. Mike has just completed his MD program, so I gues s we c an call him docto r no w, and he will be pursuing his further training as a dermatologist. His p roud dad, Stan, has come all the way from Poland to celebrate Mike’s gradua- tion. These guests are seated in the public gallery.

I would ask them to now stand and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank y ou very much, Mr. Spe aker. I ’d like to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly two guests today, Jaime Kochan and Michael Buurman. Jaime is a recent graduate from the Faculty of Education at the University of Alberta, and she has become disenchanted with the prospects in her profes- sion in the province at the moment and has thus opted for a job in the United Kingdom.

My second guest, Michael Buurman, has completed his third year at the University of Alberta in political science. This summer, I’m happy to say , Michael w ill be the ST EP student for the New Democrat opposition caucus. I would now ask that both Jaime and Mike stand and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Government Services. Mr. Coutts: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gi ves me a great deal of pleasure today to introduce two people that I see sitting in the members’ gallery. One is a nice young lady from Edmonton here, a bright, energetic, and very talented flautist. Mr.

Norris: Like all Edmontonians. Mr. Coutts: Like all Edmontonians. She’s doing a few days’ temporary work in the offices of Govern- ment Services here in the building this week. I’d like to introduce Sara Kalke. Sitting beside her is a fellow that needs absolutely no introduction to the Asse mbly at a ll, Brian H lus, who is a fam iliar name and a familiar face around here. They’re both sitting in the members’ gallery, and I’d ask them both to please rise and r eceive the tradi- tional warm welcome of the Assembly. 1:40 The Speaker: The hon. Member for West Yellowhead. Mr. Strang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s with great pleasure that I rise today and introduce to you and through you some special guests from the town of Hinton. I have 59 great young people from the Gerard Redmond school along with their parents, helpers, and also two teachers, Ms Best and Miss Dawson. At this time I’d like them to please rise and accept the warm welcome of this Assembly. head : Oral Quest ion Peri od Education Funding Dr. Nicol: Mr. Speaker, today Edmonton public schools announced the layoff of 450 teachers. That’s 10 percent of the teaching staff.

Cutting the teaching staff by 10 percent is expected to increase class size by 10 percen t. To the Premi er: why should parents take the news that their children will have class sizes 10 percent larger next year, and what can they do about it? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, I don’t blame parents for asking what’s going on. Indeed, a lot of people are asking what’s going on. Since 1996 – and the L iberals k now this – f unding for t he Edmonton public board has grown by 5 3 percen t, almost eight times grea ter than the enr ollment rate. Fu nding h as grown by e ight times the amount of the enrollment rate.

So something is going on. What is happening here? That includes a substantial portion of increased dollars this year at a rate much higher than enrollment . . . An Hon. Member: Keep reading. Mr. Klein: Yes, I’m going to read it. If you would open your ears and listen . . . Enrollment is flat. Funding is going up. An Hon. Member: Why can’t you manage? The Speaker: The Premier has the floor. Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, they have a problem managing. They have a problem listening. The management is the school board. We have given them a 53 percent increase since 1996. E nrollment has gone up 8 percent.

Enrollment this year is flat. Increased funding has been given. That is managing on our part. Mr. Speaker, I understa nd from the Learning minister that this budget is preliminary. The final budget won’t be handed down until June. I understand also that the Learning minister will work closely with the board to have a look at the budget to determine what is the problem here. What is the problem here with a 53 percent increase – 53 percent – when enrol lment is only 8 per cent? A ll these educated people over there can’t seem to understand it.

They should perhaps go back to school and learn that 53 percent does not relate to an 8 p ercent increase in enrollment. You know , that is s imple mathematics. Some of those people are professors. They should be going back to elementary school. Speaker’s Ruling Decorum The Spea ker: I’m going to recognize the Leader of the Of ficial Opposition. Also, I know that there is some tradition of he ckling that does go on in the parliament, but we have a large number of school kids here in the Assembly as well. So I’m going to ask for a greater attempt at decorum. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition.

Education Funding (continued) Dr. Nicol: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In constant dollars, there’s been no increase. To the Premier: is there any limit on how big classes c an get before this government will do something about funding? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speake r, in consta nt doll ars, there has been an increase. The reality of the situation is a 5 3 percent increase since 1996. Those are real dollars. Those are not paper dollars. Those are not dollars on pa per.

A 53 percent increase in dollars including a fairly s ubstantial i ncrease in education funding this year , with enrollment this year remaining flat and enrollment generally over the

May 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1617 last six or seve n ye ars being about 8 perce nt. That i s constant. Those are real dollars. Mr. Speaker, the opposition knows as well that we have struck a Commission on Lea rning. Tha t Comm ission on Le arning w ill report, I believe, in September. It’s to study and to make recommen- dations to governm ent on a ll asp ects of education inc luding governance, including the union situation, including classroom size, including sparsity and distance, including transportation.

Virtually every component of education will be examined, and there will be recommendations apropos to the various components of education. Hopefully, we will be able to brin g about through those recom- mendations sustainability in education, Mr. Speaker, because that’s what we all want to achieve. W e want to make sure t hat Alber ta students are getting the best education possible. We want to make sure that Alberta taxpayers are getting value for their dollars in the school system, whether they’re property tax payers or whether they fund education through the general revenue fund.

We want to make sure, most of all, that the system is sustainable for the future. Our approach is simply not to throw more money at the system and create deficits and debt. That is the Liberal way. That is not the Conserva- tive way. Dr. Nicol: To the Minister of Learning: given that teacher layoffs in Calgary and now in Edmonton are a concern to all Albertans, why aren’t they a concern to this minister, and what are you going to do about it? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Well, than k you very m uch, Mr. Speaker. They certainly are a concern to this minister, but so is our budget.

So are taxpayer dollars. So is assuring that taxpayer dollars are spent in the best possible fashion. Mr. Speaker, today at around lunchtime Edmonton public put out a scenario that I believ e is the worst case scenario. They have an increase in their budget this year of $17 million for zero percent, flat enrollment. They’re actually projecting about .02 percent, or about an increase of 20 student s, so they’re talking $17 million for an increase of 20 students. They’re also talking about an other $25 million that they say they’re short. So $42 million for essentially the same enrollment, no new students.

They’ve talked ab out c losing schools, and indeed the y have looked at c losing so me schools, which, again, will save them some money. I had a meeting with them about the audit, yesterday morning as a matter of fa ct, Mr. Spea ker, and t hey told m e some very good things that they were doing. They were looking at their school-based budgeting. They were looking at moving those schools. They were running 92 and 94 percent on salaries down to 85 percent. But the bottom line is that there’s a significant amount of dollars that ar e going in th ere.

I will be work ing with Edmonton public over the next fe w week s before they f inalize the ir budgets, and we’ll be seeing exactly how those dollars are being spent. Postsecondary Education System Dr. Nicol: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the gove rnment broadened its attack on education to include posts econdary students. B ill 43 attacks the legitimacy of student governments. Under this act it will also remove what little protection there has been for students against skyrocketing tuition fees.

To the Premier: why under Bill 43 has this Premier taken a way even the small protection that postsecondary students used to have against rising tuition fees? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, absolutely nothing has been taken away. Legislation is being contemplated to make sure that that legislation is fair and equitable to the students and indeed that the 30 percent of operating cap is the right cap. If it needs to be a djusted t hrough legislation, it will be adjusted. I’ll have the hon. minister supplement. Dr. Oberg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m absolutely shocked at that question from this member.

This is a person who is employed by the University of Lethbridge who has been actively lobbying to change the tuition fee policy. As the hon. member adequately knows, as he fully knows, t he Univer sity of Lethbridg e and the Leth bridge Community College, in his community, reached the 30 percent cap by doing a lot of efficiencies, by runni ng a ver y good s hip. The University of Lethbridge, I believe, has had a freeze for one or two years on tui tion. Lethbridge Community College has had a free ze for three years when it comes to tuition.

They were in the position where they w ere looking at things that they would have to do because the dollars were not coming in and th eir tuitions w ere significantly – significantly – lower than the rest of the system. So, Mr. Speaker, what we are doing in t he propos ed legislation that is now before the Assembly, that will not be discussed further probably until the f all sitting, is we will be looking at the tuition policy.

We will be looking and seeing exactly how we can fix the tuition policy so that your institution – your institution – can benefit from this, so that the institution you work for can benefit from this. What I ful ly anticipate is that the re will be no change in the 30 percent cap, that there will be some kind of situation made for those ones that have already reached the 30 percent cap through good management. The student groups are fully aware that they will be consulted on this.

They’re fully aware that they will be part of the decision-making and indeed will be part of the decision-making. 1:50 The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Nicol: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. But he takes it out of legislation and puts it into regulation. To the Minister of Learning: is it democratic for this minister to give himself the power of removing elected members of a students’ union? Dr. Oberg: Mr.

Speaker, one of the issues that was brought before me by the c olleges and technical schools was a situat ion where if there was a student association that was not doing the job, i f there were issues with the student association, there needed to be some- thing done about that. We have done what the colleges said, but again the reason behind introducing the bill yesterday is so that it can sit over the summer. I t alked to a rep resentative fr om CA US yesterday afternoon about this situation, and we will certainly look at it. We are open to amendments.

This is to get the discussion out on the floor, get the di scussion g oing about w hat is happe ning in postsecondary institutions right now. We will be deciding over the summer. If th ere a re an y issu es fr om an yone in t his Assembly, including the opposition, I would welcome their input on this as we continue to look at the bill over the summer. Dr. Nicol: Mr. Speaker, it’s too bad he didn’t consult wi th them first. Is it democratic for this minister to ban strike s by f aculty or graduate students or support staff at universities? Dr. Oberg: Again, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is not talking to

1618 Alberta Hansard May 13, 2003 his own institutions in his own backyard. He fully knows – he fully knows – that they were one hundred percent consulted and were in favour of this bill prior to it being brought in. I think it’s about high time that the hon. member started talking to his own institutions. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Education Funding (continued) Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. On Mar ch 19 I ask ed the Premier how many more bad-news stories he had to hear before the government adequately funds Edmonton schools.

In his response the Premier said: “This is . . . shameful. It is not the truth. There are no budget cuts.” Only an hour and a half ago, Mr. Premier, Edmonton public announced that 450 teachers w ill be cut, not laid off. They were told in their schools yesterday that they will not have a job in September. Four hundred and fifty of them. My question is to the Premier. Given the cuts to teachers in Edmonton publ ic, does t he Premier still stand by his statement that there are no budget cuts? Mr. Klein: Stand by i t? Mr. Spea ker, I more than sta nd by it. I stand up for it.

How can this person, this individual wh o is a university professor, construe a 53 percent increase in funding to be a budget cut? How can he construe a substantial increase in funding this year - increase in funding this year – to be a budget cut? If he is representative of the kind of teaching and the kind of math being used in universi ties today , then those i nstitutions or at leas t the teachers in those institutions need to be examined. Dr. Massey: Again t o the Pre mier: how can the Prem ier tell Edmonton parents who are losing their teachers t hat there are no budget cuts? How can you tell them that, Mr.

Premier? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, I can tell them precisely this: there h as been a 53 percent increa se over the past six or seven years. A 53 percent increase is not a cut. That is elementary, sir. A 53 percent increase is not a cut . A cut w ould be a 53 per cent decrease. You understand that? A decrease is when you remove money and it goes down. An increase is when you add money and it goes up. You’ve got that? Do you need a chalkboard? [interjections] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods has the floor. Dr. Massey: If you can’t see the teacher, the teacher has been cut.

My third question is to the Premier. Given that the government interference in the teachers’ collective bargaining created this crisis – you started it – will the government do the right thing and end the crisis before September by adequately funding those school districts, not just Edmonton public but three other boards in this province? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, there was ade quate funding provided. I understand the settlement cost them $36.8 million. We provided I believe it was $41 million. Mr. Speaker, I take great ex ception to the asser tion tha t we interfered.

Indeed, w e proposed an arbitration process th at was through consultation with the union, with the Alberta School Boards Association. Indeed, the arbitration process involved the ATA, the teachers’ union, appointing their repr esentative, i t involved the ASBA appointing their representative, and it involved the gover n- ment appointing a representative. S o this wa s not an arbi trary, dictatorial decision on the part of the governmen t. This was a decision that was reached through consultation and with participa- tion of the three parties involved.

The Speaker: The hon. lea der of the third party , followed by the hon. Member for Highwood. Dr. Pannu: Thank you. Well, now it’s clear, Mr. Speaker. We now know that the Tory government doesn’t care about education and is content to sacrifice a generation of children at the altar of a political grudge match with teachers. School board after sc hool board is sending teachers packing, increasing class sizes, and axing important education and community programs. The Learning minister plays the fiddle and the Premier cheers on while a once proud education system burns. My first question is to the Premier.

Given that students, parents, teachers, and school board officials all agree that this government has created a crisis, when is the Pre mier going to stop pretending that everything is dandy, stop blaming everyone else, and acknowledge that his government has failed Albertans? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speake r, again comin g fr om another universit y professor who obviously can’t do his ma th but is either very, very shortsighted or totally blind, becaus e there ha ppen to be 7 4 of us here, and there are only two of them there. Mr. Mason: Not for long. Mr. Klein: Not for long?

He says, “Not for long.” He’s absolutely right. There will be zero sitting there. Mr. Spe aker, we d o ou r ver y, very best for educa tion. A 53 percent increase over the past six or seven years is not bad. An 8 percent enrollment to be covered by a 53 percent increase I think is responsible.

I have in front of me – and there’s not enough time – page af ter page after page of success stories, w onderful stories coming from Alberta’s education system of students who are making remarkable achievements, of teachers who are making remarkable contributions, of schools that have embraced and developed tremendous spirit and camaraderie. Mr. Speaker, when I look at the students in the gallery today, I see bright, shining students, good examples of the education system. It is so ty pical of the NDs a nd the Liber als to foc us on the negative.

They have absolutely nowhere else to go, so they only talk about what is wrong. But the normal A lbertan, Mr. Speaker , understands what it is to try your darndest to do the right thing for Albertans. That’s why there are 74 of us, and that’s why there ar e only two of them. 2:00 The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Pannu : Thank y ou, M r. Speaker. The Premier is either misinformed or he’s out of touch. Does he really expect us t o believe that parents, students, teachers, and school boards are wrong and he is right? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, it’s not a matter of who’s right or wrong.

We try to do the best we possibly can. We set our budgets based on the best projections that are provided to us by the school boards and by the administration of government. Dr. Pannu: Listen to school boards. Mr. Klein: We do listen to school boards. As a matter of fact – and

May 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1619 I don’t have the letter with me – i t would give me a great deal of pleasure, if someone could retrieve the letter for me, to table a letter received from Don Fleming, the chair of the Edmonton public school board, right after the budget congratulating in no uncertain terms a particular MLA for bringing in such a fine and responsible budget. To paraphrase the letter, it said, “Good work; keep it up,” something to that effect, and that was from the chair of the public school board. So, Mr.

Speak er, people don’t take it whe n he says that w e don’t listen to school boards, especially when the chair of the school board acknowledges that, indeed, we list ened to them and responded to their concerns. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Pannu : Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er. My last quest ion to the Premier: how can the Premier deny that education will suffer when hundreds of teachers are being let go? How does he explain that? Mr. Klein: Mr. S peaker, I’m going to have the hon. minister respond, but the budget that ha s been tabled is an administ rative budget.

I understand that the final budget won’t be tabled until June. Between now and then the minister and the people in his department will be working with the s chool board to f ind out what has gone askew, particularly in light of increased funding and flat enrollments. I’ll have the minister respond as to what he intends to do. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I think there needs to be a couple of things said here. First of all, the hon. member is questioning our commitment to education. In this budget what you see is a 4.9 percent increase in all of learning.

You see, for example, in Edmonton public $17 million. The other point that I will make is that my personal budget for my department actually went down $4 million, so there h as been l ess than a zer o percent increase in my budget because I put every cent that was available out to the schools, out to the school boards, out t o t he postsec ondary e ducation institutes. What we will be doing i s working with Edmonton publi c. The numbers from them are just not adding up.

We will be working with them over the next couple of weeks w ith respect to their final budgeting procedure to determine exactly what they’re doing. To sum it up, they received $17 million, no new students, and they’re $25 million in the hole. Mr. Speaker , there’s something really wrong with that. The Speaker: The hon. Mem ber for High wood, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. School Operations and Maintenance Funding Mr. Tannas: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are to the Minister of Infrastructure.

All three school boards in Highwood are experie ncing gre at diff iculties i n meeti ng this y ear’s schoo l operations and maintenance budget owing to high fuel costs and low provincial allocations . The De partment o f L earning has a per student formula for the learning costs. Why couldn’t an operations and m aintenance formula which f actored in t he varying costs of heating fuel and electricity be part of the infrastructure formula for the operations and maintenance of our school buildings, which are under your charge? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Lund: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Currently we do use a formula. The formula i s based on so m uch per squar e foot, a nd that’s the major component of the formula. That is to take into consideration the cleaning, the v ery m inor repairs , the fue l, the heat ing, the electricity, and those ty pes of thing s. Then w e also add to that, based on the utiliza tion, the sec ond most im portant c omponent, starting at a bas e level, and that’s figuring the utili zation in at 50 percent and then es calating as you move up t o an 85 p ercent occupancy, which is considered to be a hundred percent.

Then there are some ot her factors that c ome into t he whole f ormula as well relative to distance from the shop and a few other situations. Now, there have been suggestions – and perhaps this is what the hon. member was suggesting – that, in fact, you’d have one compo- nent that would be only for the utilities operation. We believe that school boards would much prefer to have the whole operati on and maintenance rolled into one bulk sum, as we do today. There are a number of reasons for th at.

In fac t, if you have a number of new schools, they’re probably much more efficient than old ones, so to make the formula fair, you’d have to take that into cons ideration. We’re also very anxious to encourage better utilization of the dollars as far as utilities are concerned. So unle ss we hear a lot more, we intend to stay with the current way where it’d be a block fund. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Tannas: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final question is also to the Minister of Infrastructure. Mr.

Minister, what plans and policies do you have in place t o help sc hool systems avoid canceling the programs for summer ground s maintenanc e and cancel ing t heir summer building repairs and maintenance programs in order to financially balance their overstressed operations and maintenance budget? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Lund: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’re aware that, in fact , a number of school boards are having some difficulty because of the escalating costs in utilities.

I recognize that there’s really not a lot of extra money available in that operating and maintenance compo- nent of their budget. We are asking all school boards to let us know what the additi onal costs a re so we can analy ze that a nd perhaps move forward with something in the near future. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner. Electricity Transmission System Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday the Premier stated tha t the incre ases f or additional t ransmission costs f or electricity would be minuscule.

This government’s disrespect and neglect for e lectricity consumers, unfortunately, continues. Last week consumers learned that they’re going to be hit with another costly $2.6 billion bill over 10 years on their monthly power bill, and that does not include the construction costs for new power lines. To the Premier: who would be responsible to pay for the Alberta

section of transmission lines from Fort McMurray to the U.S. border built solely for export purposes? Mr. Klein: I don’t think it would be solely for export purposes. Mr. Speaker, I’ll have the hon. Minister of Energy respond, but I can’t see in my wildest dreams why a generat or of e lectricity and a company responsible for transmitting would build a line here and a

1620 Alberta Hansard May 13, 2003 line there, one for Alberta and one for export to the United States. An electron is an electron is an electron, and it moves down the same wire. I’ll have the hon. minister respond, but I just don’t see how it would make economic sense. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Smith: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I want to correct the preposterous distortions of the member that he continually makes.

I don’t know who’s writing his questions, but he knows full well that consumers will not be faced with a transmission increase charge until, one, the EUB has determined there is a need for the line; two, the transmis- sion company builds the line; three, they go back to the E UB and they ask for a rate of return, cost allocation, customer service. This guy is so out to lunch.

There is hardly any reason at all to answer his questions – they’re so preposterous – but in the interests of serving the House, as has been common knowledge for just about the last 12 months, no transmission cost will be associated to consumers in Alberta for export, period. If there is a cost on the line, it will only be for the proportion that customers use. When he refers to consumers, Mr. Spe aker, it’s most i mportant that I co rrect him that it is all consumers. It is businesses. It is industry. It is commercial enterprises. The residents use 11 percent of the power in Alberta.

Power is four to five times more expensive than generation, so it only makes sense to have transmission that is used for the benefit of Albertans. This is to put downward pressure on electricity costs. 2:10 Mr. MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, again to the Premier: given that this government is considering joining the R egional T ransmission Organization West, which is a step toward further integration with the Pacific Northwest grid of electricity in the United States, what advantages and disadvantag es are there for Alberta consumers in joining this Regional Transmission Organization West? Mr. Klein: Mr.

Speaker, if that question is for me, it’s a question that, obviously, involves a lot of detail in its answer, and I’ll have the hon. minister respond. Mr. Smith: Mr. Speaker, RTO W est is the regional transmission organization for the western United States. This is a part that British Columbia is also looking at being involved in. It’s also looking at: where could Alberta fit? Are we considering joining that organiza- tion? The ans wer is no. The ans wer is that they haven’t even responded with saying: “Can we get involved with it? Should we get involved with it?” What we’re looking for, Mr.

Speaker, in the export principles is: firstly, do Albertans get served with the cheapest amount of electric- ity generation? Secondly, if more generation is produced than what is consume d, do people hav e an outlet for it to get i t to other markets? Just a s we created a trem endous supply of natural gas through the postage-stamp transmission model, we then found ways to export it by building a new pipeline. The policy in Alberta is no different. The as sociation w ith o ther groups and RTO W est, a different transmission organization, is nothing more than conjecture or speculation. Mr. MacDon ald: Again, Mr.

Speake r, to t he Premier : can the Premier tell Albertans how much their electricity bills will increase each month so that they can pay the $2.6 billion additional over 10 years that they have been downloaded with as a result of the Minister of Energy’s decision last week? How much every month? Mr. Klein: Well, Mr. Speaker, as the hon. minister pointed out, the

preamble to the questi on was preposterous to say the leas t. The increase is not predic ated on that figure at all, a nd I’ll have the minister once again explain the facts. Mr. Smith: Mr. Speaker, if only in this House could we hav e the rule of Pinocchio tha t when you tell a m istruth, there’s a physical change, this guy’s nose would be over his desk. The Speak er: The hon. Mem ber for C ardston-Taber-Warner, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. EPCOR/Aquila Billing Practices Mr. Jacobs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Some of my constituents are continually astounded at the high cha rges on their electricity bills when the cost of electricity is supposed to be going down. Custom- ers have been seeing higher costs and new char ges on th eir EPCOR/Aquila bills. Now when energy rate riders are supposed to expire at the end of this year, many of my constituents are being told by EPCOR/Aquila that their rate riders will extend through 2004. My question to the Minister of Energy: can the minister explain why and how this is happening? Mr.

Smith: In fact, what we do know is that the concept of deregula- tion works because in the service areas not served by Aquila/EPCOR we have seen positive downward pressure on electricity prices. We have seen the increase of som e 3,00 0 meg awatts of elec tricity without adding any consumer debt, as is the case across Canada. In this particular service area there have been commercial failings, Mr. Speaker. That has resulted in 12,500 customers falling between the cracks out of a tota l population of 350,000. That’ s EPCOR’s responsibility.

They have applied to the bo ard, and they have received permission to charge that. I’m in the pr ocess of phoning EPCOR today and saying: folks, if you really want to compete in the marketplace, maybe you ca n do somet hing for the customer for a change and forgive those rates. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Jacobs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final question, also to the Minister of Energy. Insofar as what you’ve said, could I just further ask you: is this decision by EPCOR a nd th e EUB appe alable or reversible? Mr. Smith: Mr.

Speaker, this is a process that was in place under the regulated rate option and unde r the regulated rate system. In fact, when people get the opportunity with the passage of Bill 3 to make choices on how to buy electricity, to buy it combined with their gas, to make these contract decisions, they won’t have to worry about a utility coming back and asking them for more money. They’ll get one contract, one rate, and one level of consumption. Is this appealable? I don’t know. We’re into the middle of that, but I think EPCOR should just do the right thing. Air Quality at Holy Cross Hospital Dr. Ta ft: Mr.

Speake r, yes terday the Ministe r of Inf rastructure admitted that tests f or toxic mold had been c onducted at the Holy Cross hospital. Despite our request that this information be released immediately, the minister refused to make the test results public. To the Minister of Infrastructure: given that it is well known that toxic molds can lead to serious he alth problems up to and including bleeding of the lung s and eve n cancer, what polic ies does th e

May 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1621 Department of Infrastructure have for responding to buildings that test positive for these molds? Mr. Lund: Mr. Speaker, I think it’s important that we once again set the record straight. The fact is that back in 2001 we were looking for a place to house the Court of Appeal in Calgary. One of the things that we had to do as we we re looking at any location was do an indoor air quality examination. At one point we were looking at four sites. One of t hem was the Holy Cross hospital in Ca lgary. The process started.

There were a number of factors taken into consider- ation, not just the air quality. The decision was made as far as the Holy Cross that it was not a suitable location, not necessarily to do with the air. As a matter of fact, when you look at a hospital, it has an air exchange that exceeds a normal commercial building’s. We do know that the process started. I don’t believe it was eve r completed. We do not have in our possession, as far as we can determine, any final results relative to the testing on that site. As far as molds a re concer ned, Mr.

Spea ker, ther e are ov er a thousand different varieties of mold. Just a small percentage of them are toxic. So j ust because you would ha ppen to find a sample of mold in a buil ding doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s toxic. There have to be a number of other tests done before that determination can be made. Dr. Taft: He completely sidestepped the question, Mr. Speaker.

Given that there are 42 long-term care residents as well as doctors, nurses, and other suppor t staff at the Holy Cross, can the minister assure Calgarians that all appropriate steps were followed when the test results were obtained from the Holy Cross? Mr. Lund: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated , we cannot find any final results. As a matter of fact, as I said earlier, there has to be a lot of testing done in order to determine if there is a toxic mold. Clearly, under freedom of information if in fact there is in a building that we are responsible for – and that is a very important point.

The fact is that that is not one of our building s. We were looking at that building for one very specific use. If in fact it is a building that we own and operate a nd it is fo und through test s that ther e are tox ic molds that could be injurious to health, we would release the results. Dr. Taft: Your department did the tests. I hope they haven’t lost the file. Given that sitting on the results of the tests for mold at the Holy Cross vastly increases the legal liabilities to this government, why has the department chosen to sit on the results, or have they simply been lost? 2:20 Mr. Lund: Mr.

Speaker, I very much take exception to the comment that the depar tment did t he tests. Tha t is absol utely false. The department did not do the test s. As a m atter of fact, as we were doing all of these buildings, I said that there was always the need to do an indoor air quality test, and the hon. member keeps on coming back and saying that in fact we were testing for mold. No, it’s a total package of indoor quality tests. As far as this building was concerned, we never c ompleted because there w ere other issues tha t came up that ruled out this particular building. We do not own the building.

We do not operate the building. So w hy would we conti nue to go in a nd determine what the air quality is when we were not going to be renting any part of it? Aboriginal Youth Suicide Mr. Maske ll: Mr. Speaker, my question relat es to my lon gtime concern about the hig h perc entage of suicide among aboriginal youth. During my many years as an inner-city high school principal I saw too many aboriginal youth arrive already caught in the failure cycle. In spite of our best efforts, it was often too late to help them find a way out. Trag ically, to o often they c hoose suicide .

My question i s to the Minis ter of Chi ldren’s Services. What is t he government doing t o a ddress the high rate of aborig inal youth suicide? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Evans: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member is right to be concerned about aboriginal suicide among youth. It’s eight times as high as suicide among nonaboriginal children, and that’s a tragedy. Eight ministr ies are currently working on it through the Alberta children and youth initiative.

We ar e developi ng a stra tegy of working with com munities, broadening our knowle dge and ou r training, broadening our research capacity, and also coming forward to involve c ommunities in solutions. W e are on the threshold of providing our standing policy committee with a f irst look at that draft, and very shortly that will be part of our public policy discus- sion. Thank you. Mr. Maskell: Mr. Speaker, I appre ciate that an swer, but it begs another ques tion, my first and final supplemental.

Would t he Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northe rn Development tell me how such a str ategy b y itse lf wil l solve the tragedy of young aboriginal people taking their own lives in such high numbers? Ms Calahasen: Well, Mr. Speaker, the sub ject that we’re talking about is a serious concern to all of us. As a matter of fact, I received some questions last night from the opposition as well on this issue. The youth initiative that the M inister of Children’s Services just described represents another step in addressing native youth suicide and, of course, the heartache that it br ings to families.

It just adds another tool to help curb the high rate of aboriginal youth who reach such a state of despair and hopelessness. The cross-ministry initiative that wa s just desc ribed will better connect commu nities into existing provincial programs, such as wellness program s, so that w e can begi n to see thos e that are culturally specific. Mr. Speaker, it’ll also help the leaders o f aboriginal communities take positive steps to address this issue.

The ideal is to ma ke sure that we cre ate the c onditions for hope and health among aboriginal youth, and we can do that by making sure they have jobs in th e future and making sure the y have a healthy atmosphere to work in. Nitrous Oxide Engine Modification Mr. Bonner: Mr. Speaker, the glamour of street racing will return this summer with the release of a new movie in theatres, 2 Fast 2 Furious. In the movie nitrous oxide engine modifications are used to increase the power of engines by up to 300 horsepower.

Thes e nitrous oxide modifications are available in Alberta and are invari- ably used to propel racers to dangerous speeds on Alberta’s streets and highways. To the Minister of Transportation: why is it legal to buy nitrous oxide engine m odification kits in Alberta when these devices are used almost exclusively for illegal activities? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I don’t know if it’s within the mandate of the Depar tment of Transport ation to m onitor sales of var ious products through stores in the province of Alberta. However, when

1622 Alberta Hansard May 13, 2003 it comes to safety, we do have fairly rigid rules in place monitoring and controlling various activities on Alberta highways. If a person was to put one of these ki ts in a vehicl e and spee d down the highway, of course they’d get caught for speeding, number one, and, number two, starting on Tuesday, May 20, would pay significantly increased fines for that kind of behaviour. Mr. Bonner: To the same minister, Mr.

Speaker: will the minister promise to restr ict the vending and install ation of nit rous oxide engine modifications to only those cars used exclusively for track racing? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the hon. m ember does bring a good point with respect to some of the modifications on present vehicles on Alberta highways, and that is actually a point of consultation that we are undertaking with respect to a number of regulations under the Traffic Safety Act.

One of those discussions is, of course, with the car rebuilders in the provinc e and som e of the modifications occurring to some of these vehicles, not only cars but motorcycles, where we find that some of the speed on these vehicles is excessive. Again, if done on the provincial highways, it’s illegal. If done on some racing s trip, fine – I mea n, you tak e your li fe in y our own hands at that spe ed – but on provinc ial highw ays it ’s definitely illegal behaviour. Mr.

Bonner: To the minister: will the minister introduce legislation which will restrict the use of nitrous oxide engine modification kits in Alberta? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, no. You know, to say to this House that the first thing on our schedule, at least in Transportation, is to introduce legislation prohibiting – no. Although we are looking at the feedback from various pa rties that we’re consulting with on a whole bunch of iss ues including modifi cations to v ehicles w ith mufflers, with lights, all changes to frame, and raising the back end of vehicles, et cetera, also equally dangerous.

So there are all these discussions that are ongoing. However, Mr. Speaker, I wi ll say that t his matter was raised in estimates by the hon. member, and I did indicate to that hon. member that I will be getting back to him in writing once we have answered all of the questions that were raised in e stimates a co uple of d ays ago. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Education Funding (continued) Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Throughout the entire spring session the M inister of Lea rning has c ontinued to assure this Assembly that there is no crisis in Alberta’s education system. Now with teachers being laid off by the hundreds, schools closing, class sizes ballooning, and programs being cut, the minis- ter’s credibility is as low as an ant doing the limbo. My question is for the Premier. Given that Albertans are beginning to realize that while they have a popular Premier, they also have a lousy govern- ment, will the Premier explain w hy he jus t sat ther e while his minister painted a false picture for this Assembly? Mr. Klein: Mr.

Speaker, the m inister did not – did not – paint a false picture for this Assembly, and he doesn’t have to shrink to the level of an ant to get under a limbo stick. I would venture to guess that he’s far more limber than the hon. M ember for Edm onton- Highlands in mind and body. Mr.

Speaker , the mi nister is highly r egarded t hroughout the province and indeed is h ighly r egarded by the chair of the public school board here in Edmonton, who wrote on April 29, not so long ago, to the minister expressing his si ncere thanks and appreciation for the significant role he played in the g overnment’s decision to provide – and this speaks to the issue of reduced classrooms and so on – $51 million to support Edm onton public school s. “Your support for our district and for public education in A lberta is appreciated,” wrote Mr.

Don Fleming. “I am also grateful for the efforts of the Capit al Regi on Ca ucus, and have exp ressed my appreciation to individual members directly.” 2:30 To me that doesn’t sound like a lack of appreciation. This is a letter that I’m about to table from the chair of the Edmonton public school board. Now, how can this hon. member reconcile a letter of commendation with his remarks that the minister is not appreciated? How can he possibly reconcile that?

He goes on to say: we are confident that the funds are sufficient to create an exciting and revitalized Victoria school of the performing arts and that w e can als o address ot her distric t n eeds; we l ook forward to further ackn owledging your contr ibutions once t he projects are complete. Mr. Speaker, this is a letter of commendation. This is a letter of appreciation for the minis ter entire ly contr ary to w hat the hon. member says, that this minister is not appreciated.

He is indeed appreciated, and this letter is o nly one, I’m sure, of m any, many letters that the minister receives and that I receive commending the minister for his initiatives. The Speaker: There also was a point of or der raised by the hon. Government House Leader on that last question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Well, given that the letter the Premier refers to is actually directed at the Minister of Infrastructure for cap ital fu nding, ho w c an the Premier justify misleading this Assembly once again about the crisis that’s leading to layoffs of hundreds of teachers? Why would you get a letter of commendation for that, Mr. Premier? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speake r, indeed, the letter is addr essed – a nd I alluded specifically to the capital component because in his

preamble the hon. member alluded to capital relative to schools. He alluded to a lack of clas sroom spa ces w hen, indeed, w e’re adding $51 million to build more capacity for, and I might add, fewer students. Now, to spe ak to the i ssue of funding, I’ve spoken to tha t issue already relative to questions from the Liberal opposition. Again, here’s a univers ity educ ated indivi dual who shoul d be able to understand that a 5 3 percent increase is an increase, an increase in funding. A 53 percent increase is an increase. An 8 percent increase in enrollment is a much, much smaller increase. Mr.

Speaker, what we are saying is that w e have given a large amo unt of m oney to accommodate a very small increase. Comprende? Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, given that unlike some of my colleagues I’m not a professor, just a humble bus driver, can the Premier please explain to me w hy the g overnment is giv ing so much mo ney to school boards and they’re still laying off hundreds of teachers? Why is that?

May 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1623 Mr. Klein: You know, Mr. Speaker, that is a good question to ask of the school boa rd, and that is precisely the kind of questi on the hon. minister will be asking of the school board. This, I believe, is what has parents confounded. How can you be talking about laying off teachers when you get a substantial increase in funding for a flat enrollment on top of a $51 m illion bu mp in funding f or school infrastructure? How can you possibly get an increase in funding, a decrease in enrollment, and talk about laying off teachers?

This is precisely what the minister will be talking to the school board about. head : Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Business Revitalization Zones Mr. Lord: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I want to rise to say a few words about business revitalization zones, one of Alberta’s great little success stories. About 20 years ago this p rovince enacted legislation to allow small business owners to get together, get organized, and get active in revitalizing their communities.

Since that time, dol lar for dol lar BRZs have done m ore good f or more people for les s money than just about any othe r single i nitiative I know of. It is unfortunate that so few Albertans know much about BRZs. My own involv ement began in 1985 when I be came founding chairman of the South Calgary Business Revitalization Zone, almost the first BRZ in the provinc e.

We promptly renamed the area the Marda Loop, and the then ma yor of Calgar y, now our Premie r, officially cut the ribbon for us at the very first provincial BRZ promotion, the Marda G ras summer festival, which I’m proud to have helped initia te as w ell. La ter I bec ame c hairman for the Federation of BRZs, the umbrella organization representing some 5,400 small businesse s in some 40 diffe rent B RZs acros s the province.

I also managed to help initiate the Victoria Crossing BRZ, and those people were ve ry instrumental in resolving the 30-year expansion battle b etween the Calg ary Sta mpede f olks and the Victoria Park community.

Now, having been so involved over the years and watching how small business entrepreneurs put aside arguments, ideology, egos, and grandstanding to arrive at intelligent, commonsense, pragmatic solutions to just about every community is sue they face, I am personally of the opinion that if we just funded BRZ small business- people and put them in charge of solving lots of local issues, we’d get the biggest bang for our buck of all. These p eople are truly champions of innovation combined with pragmatism.

T hey never would have survived in the small business environment if they weren’t really good at problem solving. So I congratulate all the many hundreds of BRZ volunteers across this province over the past two decades for all their accomplishments in transforming and revitalizing their local communities and main streets, solving lo cal issues, and once aga in provi ng th at sma ll business is the backbone of our community and our quality of life. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-West. Queen’s Golden Jubilee Medal Recipients Ms Kryczka: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In 2002 when MLAs were asked to submit their recipient lists to the Ministe r of Com munity Development for the commemorative medal for the Queen’s golden jubilee, my level of enthusiasm was at best lukewarm, but knowing that MLAs should alwa ys w elcome opport unities to recognize individual achievements, I complied with the request.

Months later the recipients package arrived and with the help of my creative and practical-minded constituency assistant, Lisa Hofmeister, we planned a special ceremony that truly was a personal highlight of my MLA career to date largely because of the true importance of the occasion to the recipients and their families. On Saturday morning, May 3, a student of the bagpipes stood outside the constit uency office door and roundly welcomed seven worthy recipient s of the c ommemorative meda l for the Queen’s golden jubilee and their families a nd fr iends to the Calgary-West office.

By 10 a .m. there were 25 proud recipie nts, families, and friends crowded into the rec ently tidied, vacuumed, and dusted constituency office.

During a special ceremony, which I emceed, seven Calgarians of all ages were individually honoured: Wilbur Griffith, centenarian, Alberta and Calgary pioneer, and very successful businessman who will be long remembered for his Griffith Woods legacy to Calgari- ans; Doris G riffiths, posthumousl y, com munity activis t; Kelly Kryczka, silver m edalist Olympian in synch ronized swimming, member of the A lberta Sports Hall of Fame a nd Museu m, and presently an internat ional ma sters gold medal ist in sync hronized swimming; Dave Rodney, teacher, humanitarian, and the f irst and only Canadian to summit Mount Everest twice; Jamie Sorenson, a young entrepreneur and political activist; Bert Sparrow, community volunteer and chair of Persons with Developmental Disabilities Provincial Board; and Dr.

Barrie Strafford, entrepreneur, humanitar- ian of Third World countries, founder of two chairs at the University of Calgary, in geriatrics and in Alzheimer’s, and a honorary doctor- ate from the University of Calgary. In closing, we served tea in my mother’s English china teacups, set out the china teapot and lace tablecloth, and the recipients stayed to share stories and special moments with each other and all of us. It was truly a very proud, special occasion for all. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Banff-Cochrane. Karalee Derksen Mrs. Tarchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to give special recognition to Karalee Derksen, a very talented 12-year-old student at Banff elementary school. Karalee’s eloquence and thoughtfulness have made her this year’s winner in the junior essay category of the National Literacy and Post er Contest, which is sponsor ed b y the Royal Canadian Legion. Karalee’s essay was part of a class assignment last fall for which students created poems, posters, and essays. Ka ralee’s poster and poem won her regional awards, but it was her reflections on war that won her national attention.

Her essay is entitled Remembrance Day and is certainly worthy of sharing with the members of the Assembly this afternoon. On Remem brance Da y, we wear a popp y to sh ow tha t we remember those who died, fighting in war. War is a terrible thing. It is not fun with action figures or toy guns. It is not a game. War has killed mil lions and mill ions of people. In Flanders Fields, many soldiers fought and died. The graves represent the war and those who died for us. The poppy, growing out of the grave, represents hope. Because of those men and women giving their lives, we can have life.

The poppy is a new and vibrant life growing out of the sacrifice of others. These soldi ers ha d such co urage tha t they dese rve t o be honoured. B ut let us also remember those who survived and live with horrible me mories and frightening ima ges that time can n ot erase.

1624 Alberta Hansard May 13, 2003 In both 1914 and 1939 young men all across Canada sacrificed future dreams, relationships with those they lov ed an d personal ambitions to fight for their country. Some returned, but many did not. In bo th 1 918 and 1945 tho se who returned came home with minds and bodies in pain. In so much darkness, pain and loss, the o nly light was the bright red poppy. This poppy shows us that our friends died so that we could have life. Their sacrifice was not in vain. Why should we wear a poppy on Remembrance Day?

So we can show the world how these soldiers gave up their lives for our freedom and our country. Mr. Speaker , I think m embers will a gree that Ka ralee is well deserving of our recognition today, and I ask everyone to please join me in congratulating this young and gifted Albertan. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. 2:40 Public Education System Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ou r province has always been blessed with citizens willing to stand up and take action when the interests of chi ldren and youth ne eded to be f urthered or defended.

At one ti me parents could a ppeal to the ir local sc hool board and when needed involve themselves in school board elections to have the ir concerns for school s addressed. Unfort unately, the government has financially emasculated school boards, centralizing control and wiping out any r eal aut onomy over their financial resources. The past decade of changes and underfunding of public education has stirred parents to action as never before in the history of our province. So with the voice of sc hool boards muted parents have raised theirs.

When class time for kindergarten children was cut, a group of Glenora parents came to the for e and spoke up for those young Albertans. A past president of the Unive rsity of Alberta made a personal plea to each member of this Assembly to have kindergarten funding restored and eventually won the day . When budge t cuts resulted in large r classe s and fe wer cl assroom resource s, the Edmonton parent gr oup SOS, S ave Our Sc hools, was born and launched a provincewide petition campaign. In terms of constant dollars Alberta sch ools haven’t seen an increase in school allo tments since t he early 1990s.

The c hronic underfunding has fired up parents to a degree this province has never seen. Their voices have been raised in the interests of children and excellence in public education. The Calgary Association of Parents and School Councils, APPEAL, PACT, Edmonton advoca tes, the Whitemud Coalition, the Riverview Coalition, and PACE, Parents Advocating for Catholic Education, are all speaking out. These parents deserve our thanks and our support.

More impor- tantly, they deserve the ear of the government as well as a swift and adequate response t o their com plaints about the er osion of public education in this province. Thank you. head : Notices of Motions The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give o ral notice of the following two motions, which will be on the Order Paper for use if necessary. The first motion reads as follows:

Be it resolved that when further consideration of Bill 42, Electoral Divisions Act, is resumed, not more than one hour shall be allotted to any further consideration of the bill at Committee of the Whole, at which time every question necessary for the disposal of this stage of the bill shall be put forthwith. The second motion, Mr. Speaker, reads as follows:

Be it resolved that when an adjourned d ebate on third readi ng of Bill 42, Electoral Division Act, is resumed, not more than one hour shall be allotted to any further consideration at this stage of the bill, at which time every question necessary for the disposal of this stage of the bill shall be put forthwith. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Pursuant to Standing Order 40 later this aft ernoon I plan to bring before the Hous e a mot ion to adjourn the ordinary business of the Ass embly to deal w ith the following motion of urgent and pressing necessity.

The Speaker: You can read it at the time. Dr. Pannu: All right. I’ll do it later. head : Intro duc tion o f Bills The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Revenue. Bill 41 Alberta Corporate Tax Amendment Act, 2003 Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request leave to introduce Bill 41, the Alberta Corporate Tax Amendment Act, 2003. The amendments in this bill will introduce the third phase of the corporate income tax deductions as announced in Budget 2003. This bill will make Alberta’s corporate income tax rates for both small business and general business the second lowest among all provinces in Canada.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 41 read a first time] head : Tabling R eturns and R eports The Speaker: The hon. Solicitor General. Mrs. Forsyth: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings today. The first is the Alberta Law Enforcement Review Board 2001 annual report being table d in accorda nce with

section 14 of the Albe rta Police Act. The board is the appeal body for complaints concerning police officers. During the period covered by the report the boar d dealt with 34 appeals, down slightly from previous years. Mr. Speaker, my s econd tabling is the Victi ms Programs status report for 2001-2002. This annual report shows that over 1 and a half million dollars in grants was provided to 78 victim assistance programs. These programs reported ha ndling over 30,000 new cases, over half of those involving assistance to victims of violent crime. The Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Sustainable Resource Develop- ment. Mr. Cardinal: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table five copies of some materials that have been developed by the Alberta Forest Products Associ ation for an infor mation campaign that they have launched. This campaign tells a story about forestry, a very important industry in the diversification and prosperit y of Alberta’s economy. I will make sure that all MLAs receive a copy of this great information package, which provides some very good news. Thank you.

May 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1625 The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Sp eaker. I rise to day to table five copies of the L aw Socie ty of Alberta annual repor t 2002. The mission of the Law Society of Alberta is to serve the public interest by promoting a high standard of legal services an d pro fessional conduct through the governance and regulation of an independent legal profession. As Mi nister of Justice I meet regularly with the Law So ciety to discuss issues a nd obtain their feedback.

T he relationship between the Law Society and Alberta Justice is not only very strong but most valuable as we work together to improve justice for Albertans. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Meadowlark. Mr. Maskell: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m tabling five copies of a letter received from a constituent of mine, Mrs. Lois Bell, in which she shares with me her concerns regarding education funding. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Mr. Lord: Thank you, Mr. Speak er.

I ris e to table th e requisite number of copies of six different reports all relating to California’s electrical system, which I believe has great relevance to Alberta’s electrical situation. The first is a report, Energy Efficiency Leader- ship in California, outlining an unprecedented energy conservation program which is saving $12 billion and helped California dodge the bullet of major blackouts.

The second is a report from the World N uclear A ssociation discussing opportunities i n California where almost no generation had been built in 15 years, leaving them to have to import 25 percent of their electricity, which they are still doing at a time when Alberta is discussing exports. The third is entitled California’s Dreaming. The fourth is Electricity Reliability Issues in California, talking about how policy makers tried to shield cons umers from higher power bills by overregulating and g ave them rolling black outs in years of shortages and imports instead.

The last two are Power Politics and Retail Electricity Deregula- tion: Demons trating the Benefi ts of Choic e by Nobe l laureat e economist Vernon Smith, discussing how California never actually attempted deregulation. What they did at best was worse regulation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two sets of tablings today.

The f irst is f rom a constituent, a y oung dedicated teacher, writing to me with her concerns that although she’s been teaching for two years, she thinks she may be forced out due to the conflicts with the government in the funding of education. Given the announce- ment today, that’s quite likely. The second set of tablings are two published documents. These are put out by Changing Together, A Centre for Immigrant Women. The first i s A Ha ndbook for Em ployers of Liv e-In Caregivers i n Alberta, written by Caridad Bernardino, PhD, with Denise Spitzer, PhD.

The second is A Handbook for Live-In Caregivers in Alberta, prepared by Idalia Ivon Pereira and Denise Spitzer, PhD. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings today. The first is from Alvin Reib, a senior in my constituency who is very concerned and upset w ith how the medical system treats senior s these days. The second tabling is an addition to the petition I tabled last week.

That petition was signed by 358 Alber tans urging the Legislative Assembly to stop development in Kananaskis Valley, but about 50 of those nam es were out of or der for the petition, so I am tabling their names today. 2:50 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu : Thank you ver y much, M r. Sp eaker. I’ve go t two tablings today, the first being a document from the Edmonton public school board titled Response to the Minister of Learning regarding Alberta Learning’s Operational Review of Edmonton Public Schools dated May 2003.

This document addresses the board’s position on the district’s deficit and related issues. The second tabling, Mr. Speaker, is a letter from Alberta Federa- tion of Wom en United f or Families dated April 17, 2003. In the letter to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General the federation has asked the minister to make the necessary changes to legislation so grandparents may maintain ongoing contact with their grandchil- dren. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With permission I would like to table the required num ber of copi es of a lett er w ritten to the Premier from a school council in the Premier’s constituency – Leslie Newton, Barb Homer, Wanda Watson, and Liz Hagerman – urging the Premier to “take leadershi p and properly invest in public education.” The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have fiv e tablings today.

The first is a news release from the Calgary Association of Parents and School Councils dated March 19, 2003, questioning the Minister of Learning’s decision to close five CBE schools and open another charter school in Calgary. The second tabling is a letter from Liz Greenaway of Edmonton dated March 18, 2003, regarding the government’s policy of making schools dependent on casinos. The third tabling is a letter from R.H. Foerger of Edmonton dated March 5, 2003, addressed to his M LA, w ho is the Minis ter of Community Developm ent, rega rding the unde rfunding of his children’s school.

The fourth tabling is a letter from Cindy LeClercq of Hinton dated March 20, 2003, addressed to the Minister of Infrastructure asking him to change the school utilization formula. The final ta bling today is a lett er fro m Brenda Davidson of Edmonton dated March 21, 2003, addressed to the Premier regarding the continuing degradation of education in Alberta. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Hon. members, I’m pleased again to table five copies of a new brochure that’s produced, and I think all members will find it of considerabl e interes t.

It’s tit led: Page B iographies, 25th Legislature, 3rd Sessi on, Spring 2003. It’s a fitting tribute to the young pages that work with us. A copy will be forwarded to you momentarily.

1626 Alberta Hansard May 13, 2003 head : Tablings to t he Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following documents were deposited w ith the off ice of t he Clerk by the hon. Mr. Mar, Minister of Health and Wellnes s, pursuant to the Regional Health Authorities Act, Mistahia health region 2002 annual report; by the hon. D r. O berg, Min ister of Learni ng, Research Technolo gy Management Inc. financi al statements 2000 to 2003; re sponse to Written Question 9 asked for by Dr.

Mass ey on Ma rch 17, 2003; Alberta Learning 2002-2005 business plan; school j urisdictions’ audited financia l statements, sections 1 to 3, for the year ended August 31, 2001; public postsecondary institutions’ audited financial statements, including public colleges and technical institutes for the year ended June 30, 2001, and universities and Banff Centre f or Continuing Education for the year ended March 31, 2002; pursuant to the Adv anced Educa tion Foundations A ct the Univ ersity of Alberta

(1991) Foundation financial statements for the period ended November 7, 2000; the Arctic Institute of North America financial statements, March 31, 2001; the Olympic Oval financial statements, 1999 to 2001; Public Coll eges Foundation of Alberta financial statements 1998 and 1999. The Speaker: The hon. Gover nment House Leader on a point of order. Point of Order Parliamentary Language Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I haven ’t often risen on points of order i n the House. We’re drawing to the end of this session possibly, and the language, in my submission, is deteriorat- ing. The hon.

Me mber for Edmonton-Highlands in his questions, while often giving colourful examples, this afternoon went way too far in the language that he used, and I would request that you find the language unparliamentary and ask for an apology. Specifically, under 23(

h) of our Standing Orders, “makes allega- tions against another member,” and 23(j) “uses abusive or insulting language of a nature likely to create disorder.” I would also refer to 485 of Beauchesne, “Unparliamentary words may be brought to the attention of the House either by the Speaker or by any Member,” and 491: The Speaker has consistently ruled that language used in the House should be temperate and worthy of the place in which it is spoken. No language is, by virtue of any list, acceptable or unacceptable.

A word which is parliamentary in one context may cause disorder in another context, and therefore be unparliamentary. I would also refer to both your memo to House leaders early in the session as well as the other sections in Beauchesne, 488, 489, 490 and 491, relative to unparliamentary language.

The exchange which I’m referring to is an exchange in which the hon. member accused the Minister of Learning during a que stion directed at the Premier of painting a false picture for this Assembly throughout the spring – now, I may not have the exact words; I don’t have the benefit of the Blues – and later on in the next question, of misleading the Assembly. Often we’ve heard language in

preambles to questions which have been, in my humble submission, unparliamentary but unfortunately or fortunately not directed at any par ticular member and therefore difficult to draw forward for sanction. We’ve had

preambles which are grotesque in the extreme with respect to how they try to change and adapt what the government’s position is in order for them to put forward a question which they can ch aracterize. B ut I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that in the framing of this particular question, the hon. member has gone too far. He has in essence accused the Minister of Learning of lying to the House. That is unparliamentary.

The language is going too far, and we ought to draw back and, in the words of rule 491, be cognizant of the fact that language “should be temperate and worthy of the place in which it is spoken.” The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. While I listened with interest to the hon. Government House Leader’s point of order, I would submit that in fact the language contained in my question today was not in contravention of the r ules. Indee d, it w as qu ite consistent with norm al parliamentary practice.

He indicated, for example, that one of the statements which I was purported to have made, that the House had been misled, is contained in expressions ruled unparliamentary by Speakers of the L egislative Ass embly, according to a document provided to all members by yourself. With respect to the implication contained in the question, that the minister had “pain ted a false pict ure for thi s Assembly,” I would maintain that that is in fact a correct statement, Mr. Speaker.

On a number of occasions, the government and particularly the Minister of Learning has denied, in response t o questio ns put to him in this House, that there was in fact any crisis in our education system. It is my view that layoffs across the province, increases in class sizes, cuts to prog rams are all m atters of fact w hich can be verified by anyone who wishes to contact any number of school boards in this province. It is this mem ber’s opinion tha t these f acts tak en in conjunction do in fact represent a crisis.

So it is the opinion of this member that the minister, in denying that there was a crisis, has in fact painted a false picture for the Assembly. The real picture, in my opinion, is quite different than that suggested during question period during thi s sp ring sit ting of t he As sembly by the Ministe r of Learning to the Assembly. So I would argue, Mr. Speaker, that there is in fact no valid point of order. Thank you. 3:00 The Speaker: Other participants?

Hon. members, one can suggest and it’s made very, very clear that the operative words with re spect to thi s are the phrase, “ will the Premier explain why he just sat there while his minister painted a false picture for this Assembly?” That’s what was said. The words “false,” “falsehood,” “false statements” are words that have in some instances been found to be unparliamentary but not on all occasions, and hon. me mbers can refer to Beauchesne 489 and Beauchesne 490.

The key ci tation, however, with respec t to this particular matter is Beauchesne 491 for the point that a word may be unparliamentary in one context if it causes disorder but not necessar- ily another conte xt, whic h, again, doe sn’t help cl arify, but th e context is extremely important. One should also be governed by citations from Standing Orders 23(h), (i), and (j). Now, in this case, painting “a false picture for this Assembly” would suggest to the chair some intent or deliberateness and would seem to be akin to an assertion of deliberately misleading the House. The hon.

Membe r for Ed monton-Highlands indica ted that the debatable point with respect to crisis was in his opinion, and he used the terminology “in his opinion” on several occasions, which would not suggest a suggestion of factualness necessarily: an opinion. So this would seem to me that this would be unparlia mentary, and in fact I’m going to rule that it is unparliamentary. I’m going to rule that it d oes not uphold the dignity of the Ho use nor the member himself. I’m g oing to ask the hon. me mber to w ithdraw thos e statements.

May 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1627 Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, I’m pleased to withdraw those statements. I appreciate your ruling, and I would also wish to apologize to the Minister of Learning and all members of the House for my transgres- sion. Thank you. head : Motions under St anding Order 40 The Speaker: The hon. Mem ber for Edm onton-Strathcona on a Standing Order 40 application. Education Funding Dr. Pannu:

Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly urge the government to adjust school board operating grants to fully fund the arbitrated teachers’ settlement, cover rising school utility costs, and remove the cap on grade 10 credits. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Now, with your permission I would like to make a brief set of arguments for urgency. Speaking to the urgency of this motion, in two days’ time the spring sitting of the Legislature is likely to come t o an end. As w e return to our ridings, what we would be leaving behind is an education system in crisis.

This is a school financial crisis unprecedented in it s scope and severity. The dire financial position of school boards stands in stark contrast to the province’s fiscal picture and outlook, which couldn’t be rosier. Last wee k the Calgary board of education announced it was cutting 400 staff in total, including the loss of 300 teachers. Today Edmonton public schools announced the loss of 450 t eaching positions alone. Calgary Catholic has announced it’s facing a $9.5 million shortfall. Nor is this fiscal crisis, Mr. Speaker, restricted to Alberta’s two big cities.

It’s much more generalized and affects lots of school boards and regions of our bea utiful province. School board after school board is giving the same three reasons for acute financial crisis that they are al ready facing; namely, government’s failure to fully fund the arbitrated settlement with teachers, two, its refusal to assist school boards with skyrocketing utility costs, and, three, the government’s decision to impose a cap on the number of credits it will fund for hardworking grade 10 students.

As legislators we have the responsibility to deal w ith this acute school funding crisis now, not leave it to the whims of the executive branch to act or fail to act based on its own political needs. As the stewards of public d ollars what could be more important than debating the crisis in o ur schools in this Assembly this afternoon? Speaking to urgency, Mr. Speaker, we need to debate this motion this afternoon because there’s no other option ava ilable to us for expressing the will of this Assembly on this matter.

As an opposi- tion member I’m not able to amend the appropriation bill to adju st operating grants to schools. The emergency motion I’m proposing provides the opportunity for us as members to express our collective voice in urging the government to fix the financial crisis i n ou r schools that government itself caused. I therefore urge all members to support the request to debate this emergency motion this afternoon.

Thank you. [Unanimous consent denied] head : Orders of t he Day head : Priv ate B ills head: Third Reading [The members indicated below moved t hat the f ollowing bills be read a third time, and the motions were carried] Pr. 1 Sisters of St. Joseph of the Province of Alberta Statutes Repeal Act Griffiths Pr. 2 Forest Lawn Bible College Act Pham head : Government Bills and Orders head: Second Reading Bill 39 Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move Bill 39, Miscella- neous Statutes Amendment Act, 2003, for second reading. As indicated earlier, prior to introducing Bill 39 to the House, we followed the process that is always followed with respect to miscella- neous statutes and c irculated the proposals to bot h opposition parties, about a month ago sent the final draft version – I think it was April the 28th – to opposition parties with respect to the final version of the bill, and had approval to introduce it in the form that it’s in. I would ask the House t o approve it for second reading.

I would advise the House that there is now a suggestion that there may be an amendment at committee, which in my view is most unfortunate and certainly should have been avoidable given the process that we go through. However, we’ll await committee to see how we deal with it at that point in time. I’d ask the House to approve it for second reading now. [Motion carried; Bill 39 read a second time] Bill 40 Appropriation Act, 2003 The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. On beha lf of the hon.

Minister of Finance I’d move Bill 40, the Appropriation Act, 2003, for second reading. The Appropriation Act is merely, as the House knows, an encapsulation of what we’ve been discussing in this House for the last 24 days of Comm ittee of Supply, an d we h ave completed Committee of Supply with respect to each of the departments and had the votes on the estimates in Committee of Supply for each of the departm ents. I wou ld ask the House to appr ove now t he Appropriation Act so that we can get on with paying the bills. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker. I’m pleased to rise to speak to the Appropriation Act , 2003. Now, we’ve had a great deal of debate with respect to the appropriations and an opportunity to question t he minist ers on the budget, which is now contained within this act. So it’s clear that the Ass embly is being a sked to provide its endorse ment of the gove rnment’s spending pla ns and requests for fundi ng from the ta xpayer in order to suppor t their program. 3:10 Unfortunately, Mr. Speak er, there are a number of seri ous deficiencies with respect to the government’s plans for the coming budget year.

The foremost among them is the failure of the govern- ment to deal w ith the educa tion crisis that is now upon us. You know, it’s interesting listening to the twists and turns of the govern- ment on this issue when they’re questioned on it in question period, and certainly they have a great deal of flexibility in whether or not

1628 Alberta Hansard May 13, 2003 they answer questions or whether or not they simply just go on the attack against oppositio n memb ers base d on their occ upation or facility with ari thmetic or whate ver it is that the government may seem to think is relevant. What I think the people who pay the taxes think is relevant is why the government is in a position where it repea tedly claims that it provides m ore funding for education per capita than any other province and why it is that we’re f aced with significant layof fs, school closures, program cuts, and a lot of unhappy parents a nd teachers and students.

The government seems to think that every- body is wrong except them. The government always measures any increase in funding f rom the poi nt of the low est level of funding, which was following the c uts in 1993-94, so they meas ure any funding increases from that point. Of course, it’s generally acknowl- edged now, Mr. Speaker, that the government cut far too deeply and far too quickly and with far too little foresight at that time. In fact, the Premier a couple of years after admitted that the government did not have a plan when it came to the health care cuts.

But in the area of the education situation there are three significant contributing factors to what ha s happened . First of all, of course, was the teac hers’ settlement, Mr. Speak er. Now , the Ministe r of Learning repeated over and over again before the teachers’ strike that they were being extrem ely gener ous and they were allocati ng 4 percent and 2 percent, which he habitually called 6 percent, and that the teachers would have to be satisfied with that.

Then the strike occurred, and the government set in place an arbitration process that clearly was different from most arbitration processes in that it was stacked against the teach er. There was an additional person on the arbitration panel that represented employer interests. Never theless, this arbitration process gave t he teachers considerably more than the minister ha d allocated in the prev ious budget. In fact, the teachers’ settlement was similar to settlements that had been re ached voluntarily with the g overnment before the last election; for exa mple, w ith medic al profes sionals, inc luding nurses.

Then the government refused requests to provide the additional funding to meet the settlement, and that left the school boards in the situation they’re in now. T hey have to find the money to pay t he teachers’ increase from existing programs. That means that even though the government is correct technically in saying, “Well, we gave, you know, 4 percent more,” what happened is that the costs of the school boards rose much more than 4 percent because most of their bill goes to salaries.

So that’s one very significant piece that the government does n’t like to tal k about w hen the oppositi on questions them in que stion period. T hey just go back into th eir message box and keep repeating the same old stuff. A second piec e is, of course, high utility costs. L ike all publ ic institutions and like a ll medium and sma ll businesse s and all homeowners and farmers in this province, school boards are faced with mass ive increa ses in thei r electr icity bi lls, another sterling example of this government’s enlightened and competent administra- tion of public affairs, Mr. Speaker. Dr.

Taft: You might want to point out that that was sarcasm. Mr. Mason: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview wants me to point out that I had my tongue in my cheek when I was talking about the com petent and e nlightened administration of our prov- ince’s affairs, and that’s in fact the case, Mr. Speaker. Then there’s t he question of the natural gas pri ces which the school boards h ave to meet, and again there’s no corresponding increase in their budget from the government in th ese estimates to cover that. Of course, the third factor that’s common to most school boards across t he province, Mr.

Speaker , is the cut to credits for grade 10 students. So those are the three elements that make up the current financial crisis facing educa tion in this provi nce today. The gov ernment’s estimates don’t deal with them, Mr. Speaker. They simply don’t deal with the financial reality that school boards face. The irony of the thing is that all three of these things are o f the government’s own making. The arbitration process to settle the teachers’ strike was the government’s process.

The high utility bills are the direct result of deregulation of electricity, and of course the cap on credits for grade 10 students is a policy of the Minister of Learning. The government has set three things as obsta cles to the school boards ’ path to financial solvency and then has refused to fund it, and they have the nerve and the Premier had the nerve today to say: “You know, we don’t know what’s going on. We k eep giving them more money.

You know, the school boards just can’t manage.” He had really no answers, but it didn’t st op the Premi er from really insulting the intelligence of the Assembly and of the people of Alberta. I believe that the people of Alberta know exactly why we have this crisis in our education system now, and they know exactly who’s responsible. I think it w ould be a w onderful thing if the g overnment would stand up and say: “You know, listen; we’ve kind of messed up with the teachers’ settlement. We’ve kind of messed up with electricity deregulation.

We’ve kind of m essed up with the cap on grade 10 credits, and, you know, we’ve kind of messed up because we haven’t covered these things in this budget. So let’s take the budget back, and let’s meet again after the long w eekend. W e’ll bring back a budget that actually deals with these things so that we don’t have to lay off teachers, so that we don’t have to cut programs for students,” including even at the postsecondary level where they’re cutting the program at Grant MacEwan on sign language. That’s one of the very few programs in the entire country, and it’s a leading program.

So those are the kinds of things that are getting cut. Young graduating teachers are le aving the country, leaving the province to teach elsewhere because school boards can’t hire them, people are losing t heir jobs, and chi ldren’s education is suffering, and t he go vernment keeps g iving m oney to hors e racing , Mr. Speaker.

Not only that, but we heard the Minister of Revenue stand in the Assembly just this afternoon and introduce a bill that brings in another tax cut for corporations. [i nterjections] Yeah, and the Minister of Economic Development applauds that move, and that’s no surprise to me, because he thinks that we should be investing in companies and not in people, or at least tha t’s my view of his position. 3:20 So, Mr.

Speaker, the government’s priorities are clearly wrong, and this bill re flects those distor ted prioritie s, where you put the thoroughbred ahead of the grade 3 student, where you put Shell or ATCO ahead of teachers or the health care system. Particularly on the education side I think there’s a real problem with this bill before us. I think that the Assembly should vote it down, and I’d urge all members to vote against the Appropriation Act, 2003.

You know, I think there are a number of areas where we could do more except that when the Minister of Revenue has finished with his next act of cutting taxes for corporations, the government’s revenue situation is going to be even more dependent on oil and gas revenues than it already is. I think that that’s a real problem. It’s also going to be another situation where the government is more dependent on gaming revenues, and we now have lottery fund payments of nearly $1.1 billion, Mr. Spe aker, that come straight out of the pockets of people who in many cases just can’t afford it.

So it’s another way of avoiding taxing people who can afford it, and that’s another long- established principle of this government.

May 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1629 I want to indicate that we have seen an increase in infrastructure investment in this provi nce, and I do want to in dicate overall my support for that direction. Infrastructure has incurred a significant deficit over the years, Mr. Speaker.

It’s interesting that the govern- ment has placed so much focus o n the financial deficit, but at the same time any Auditor General could tell you that they’ve been building up a significant deficit within the capital infrastructure of the province, because if it’s not replaced in a timely fashion, then we have a situa tion where you hav e to replac e it late r. You have to spend the money. In fact, you ha ve to in many case s spend even more money. It’s a little bit like putting off your oil changes because you can’t afford the cost or you don’t think you can afford the cost of the oil.

W hen you eventually get around to cha nging your oil, you may find that there’s wear and tear on the engine, and the costs are very much greater than had you just paid for the oil at the right time. That’s the kind of planning on the infrastructure side that this government has been doing for a number of years, and now they’re trying to correc t the situa tion by throw ing a lot of money at it. I think that had they funded it adequately on an ongoing basis, they probably would have had less d raw on the taxp ayer than we have here. So it’s another example of how the government is not running the province well.

I want to come to the question of resource revenues. Here is what saves the government time and time again, Mr. Speaker. I think we all know that they can mess up in a worse way than governments in other provinces and avoid being punished at the ballot box because they have enough money to fix the problem just in time. I think that was the case certainly before the last election with electricity prices, where there was $2.2 billion in various rebate programs that were thrown at that particular mess of the government’s own creation.

We have seen a c ontinuing pattern of underestimating the am ount of resource revenue that comes their way so that they post on a regular basis massive surpluses. It provides a number of political advantages for the government to do it that way. For example, the government in the last 10 years has underestimated total reve nues b y a cum ulative t otal of ov er $23 billion. It boggle s the m ind, Mr. Speak er. Duri ng tha t time, the government has underes timated its own bud get s urplus by a cumulative total of over $20 billion.

The government is thereby able to keep pleading poverty right into June every year until it’s too late to do anything with unbudgeted surpluses other than apply it to the provincial debt. Now, the rules around that have been loosened just this last year, but the government has been able to use this strategy in order to defer and deflect deman ds for ed ucation fundi ng, for example, or many other im portant things while the y are amassing massive surpluses.

Then they can put that towards the debt, and, you know, surprise, surprise, they have a lot more money than they have said all along, and I thi nk Albertans are beginn ing to see th rough that.

In fact, we’re wondering whether or not history is going to repeat itself n ext m onth when the ministe r reports tha t the 2002-2003 budget surplus may be $1 billion to $2 billion higher than previously forecast in the th ird-quarter update, and w e think that that’s very likely given the p rices of natural g as, which have re mained stub- bornly high notwithstanding the fact that winter is over, and that, of course, is one of the main drivers of government surplus revenues. We know t hat the gov ernment claims that the c upboard is bare when it comes to teachers, that there is no more money for schools.

All th e while , avera ge oil pric es in fis cal 2002-03 w ere slig htly higher than two years earlier, but the government is still forecasting $700 million less in crude oil royalties than it actually brought in in 2000-2001. So where is the cons istency, the scie nce in this, Mr. Speaker? I don’t understand how the government does this forecast- ing. It doesn’t seem to have much to do with actual oil and ga s prices. It seems to have more to do with how the government wants the balance sheet to come out and how the surplus has been tucked away out of sigh t.

Given that the gove rnment is reap ing a multibillion-dollar windfall from natural gas prices that remain more than 50 percent higher than forecast in last month’s budget, I’d like to know whet her or not the government was going to hoa rd this windfall or if the y’re prepared to invest a small portion of the windfall in the province’s children. I am assuming that that bell meant my time is up, and I would like to thank all members for their patience and urge them to vote against this Appropriation Act. Thank you. 3:30 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker.

I have a number of comments on this parti cular bill . I was li stening to the co mments fr om t he Member for Edmonton-Highlands with some interest and generally found them to be pretty sound as an analysis of the situation we’re facing here today. I have a number of points of my own to add to that. Fundamentally, I find that the entire process through which this government forms a budget is seriously flawed. T he budget was introduced eight days into the fiscal year . It will be approve d – what? – seven weeks or six weeks into the fiscal year.

There’s no reason in the world that I can see that we couldn’t rotate the entire process back through the calen dar yea r so that w e were actually approving a budget in advance. After all, a budget is a plan, and there’s not a lot of value in planning for even ts after those events have unfolded, and that’s what we’re doing rig ht now, today .

In fact, the process gets worse, because once the budgets are approved for the various government departments, then that ripples on through the time line so that the regional health authority business plans and budgets are approved even later in the year, as are the business plans and budgets for the persons with developmental disability boards, for the children’s authorities, and in fact , as we ’re seeing played out today, even for the school boards.

We certainl y had si tuations las t yea r where reg ional health authorities went throug h more tha n half the year w ithout t heir business plans and budgets approved. Just unacceptable d elay i n proper management, a real violation of any fundamental business or public finance organization. On its very fundamental process, I’m struggling with this document today, and I would strongly encourage the government to rearrange the entire process that we are approving budgets before the beginning of the fiscal year. That is possible; it’s simply a matter of political will.

There are a number of specific areas that I need to touch on. Most dramatically, most timely for this very date is the education budget. The events that we’ve seen today in which 450 teachers appear to be losing their jobs in the Edmonton public school board and hundreds of other teachers and other school board staff across the province are losing their jobs m akes it clear to me that there is a fundamental problem in the educa tion budget. T he facts are pre tty clear. The government mandated a settlement process w hich resulted in a 14 percent increase in salari es for teachers to be prov ided over t wo years.

Having found that to be mandatory, instea d of ponying up and providing adequate funding for that, the government has failed in its responsibility and instead has forced the school boards to lay off liter ally hundreds of t eachers. Th at is t o me the single most urgent and immediate crisis we see in this particular budget, and it is a sham e. It’s a tragedy , in fac t, that that’s not going to be addressed here. [Mr. Lord in the chair]

1630 Alberta Hansard May 13, 2003 Gaming revenues are equa lly a pr oblem f or this budget or a concern for me. We are seeing in this budget a 14 percent increase in gross gaming revenues in this province. At that rate the total gaming take in Alberta will double in less than five years. We are already in a situation where the gross amount gambled legally within this province is more than doubl e the total amount s pent by thi s government on health care. Imagine that. Albertans gamble more than twice as much, legally within the boundaries of this province, as they spend on health care.

Five years from now, at the rate it’s increasing recently, that amount spent on gambling will double. It’s a very, very serious concern. I think all members of this Assembly and all citizens of Alberta should be asking themselves: do we want a gambling-based economy? This government is pulling in substan- tially more now from gambling revenues than it does from conven- tional oil and heav y oil com bined. That is to me a frig htening indication of how the economy of this province is being rearranged. Do we w ant to go the re? I k now that I for one don’t, and many people in my constituency don’t either.

Health premiums. Another aspect of this budget that I’m deeply opposed to is the health premiums. In principle, health premiums in my view should be abolished. The party of this government, the PC Party, has in fact passed resolutions calling for their abolition. Many backbenchers are calling for their abolition. Let’s call a spade a spade: a health car e premium is a tax, an d it is a regres sive tax. When you combine the flat tax regime with the health care premi- ums, the most heavily taxed people in this province are the working poor. They’re paying taxes at a higher percentage than millionaires.

Surely that is unfair. It is absolutely true. [interjections] I’m getting heckled by members of this government. But the people paying the highest percentage of th eir income in taxes to this government are the working poor . That would be an abomination in any other province – it ’s certainly not tr ue in any state in t he USA – a nd it should not be accepte d in Albert a. Healt h premium s should be abolished. The oil sands royalty regime is another area of concern. Over the last couple of years the so-called generic oil sands royalty regime has come in.

The provincial government’s revenues from oil sands have dropped significantly. Now, the logic of this maybe is defensible on paper. The logic is that providing low-cost royalty rates during the capital construction phase and e arly ope rational pha ses of t hese plants and allow ing the com panies to re cover thos e costs be fore royalties rise to 25 percent of net level will encourage the construc- tion of all kinds of heavy oil plants. The problem is becoming clear.

In reality, the problem is that it is such a ge nerous regime that it has s timulated a flood of invest- ments into the heavy oil sands of Alberta. The effect of that is not good. The effect of that has in fact been self-defeating. Costs have soared. La bour shortage s have s oared. Inf lation has s oared. Bottlenecks have soared. Infrastructure is overtaxed. The hospital system in Fort McM urray, for example, is com pletely inadequate. The hi ghways t o Fort McMurra y are inadequate.

Rather tha n a carefully thought through, phased-i n regime that m aximizes the direct public benefit of the oil sands development, we created a kind of gol d rush at public expense, which in fact is becoming sel f- defeating. We are seeing now because of the problems created by this gold rush serious delays in capital investment in Alberta’s heavy oil sands. So there are serious, serious issues to be raised around the oil sands royalty regime. We tally these kinds of thing s up, and I find w e’re looking at a government that does not in fact have anything like the management record it claims to have.

I suspect that they’re going to see unfold the same problems in education and teaching that we saw unfold in nursing and health care professionals over the last several y ears. Five, six, sev en y ears ago thousands of health ca re professionals were laid of f. Wit hin three y ears A lberta w as fac ing a dras tic shortage of health care professionals and had to provide a 22 percent increase in salaries to health care professionals to keep them from fleeing the province and to try desperately to attract new people back into t his p rovince.

As a re sult, the cont ribution to heal th care expenditures soared. 3:40 We are now seeing t he same thing occ ur in educati on. We’re losing hundreds and hundreds of teachers. The a verage age of the teaching profession is going to rise. Two or three or four years from now we’re going to see a shortage of teachers, and teachers will be able to demand even more generous wage settlements, driving up the tax bill. So we’re going through all of this kind of instability for no gain whatsoe ver. It’ s all pain, no gain. Poor, short-t erm, self- destructive management. [The Speaker in the chair] So, Mr.

Speaker, I find that there are a host of reasons to challenge this particula r bill, a hos t o f reasons to oppose it, and a host of reasons to wish that this government would get its financial manage- ment act together. There is one thing only that saves this govern- ment from gross e mbarrassment, and that is the gene rosity of our natural resources. If it wasn’t for the revenues generated by those, this government would have collapsed years and years ago. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 40 read a second time] Bill 42 Electoral Divisions Act [Debate adjourned May 12: Mr.

Hancock] The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I made a few remarks last evening when I int roduced Bill 42 for second reading, and I just want to add a couple more thoughts before the floor is open for other members.

In bringing forward Bill 42 in the form that was proposed by the Electoral Boundaries C ommission, I i ndicated that during the committee stage of t he debat e I woul d be b ringing forward some amendments relativ e to ma tters w hich ha ve been proposed by communities or by members of the Assembly to me as being within the context and philosophy of the report. Unfortunately, there are some communities that have put forw ard proposals, and there are some areas in the report that cannot be fixed by amendment in this House. I just want to speak briefly about, for example, the situation with respect to Edmonton.

T he boundaries commission in doing its numbers and putting it s maps tog ether indic ated that E dmonton would lose a seat, and that became a very substantial issue for all of us in Edmonton, for all members representing Edmonton, and for the community of Edmonton because in some way that was seen as a loss of pride, a los s of positi on, and a loss of place . But, Mr .

Speaker, we felt – and I think this House concurred by passing the resolution – that it w ould not have be en appropr iate to send the commission report bac k, to ask a ne w commission to draft a new report, because the n umbers and the c ircumstances w ere not sufficient to sugge st tha t any ne w report would com e back i n a different fashion than the first comm issioned re port cam e. One

May 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 1631 ought not to turn back a report prepared by an independent commis- sion when in fact they have taken into account the factors which are set out for them in the act. They have followed the guidelines, and there was no egregious error to be pointed out. That doesn’t mean that we have not stood up for the city of Edmonton in terms of trying to point out why the seats should be there. But the reality is that when you go through the numbers, the city of Calgary has grown more in absolute numbers than the city of Edmonton. Other parts of the province have grown as well.

While one doesn’t have to agree with the Electoral Boundaries Commission report, one can’t fault them for the lo gic that t hey employed, and therefore it would not have been appropriate to send it back. The resolution having been passed by the House , the bill is now before us, and we do have the opportunity for minor amendments in committee.

I might be anticipating and I expect that we’ll hear from the opposition that members from Edmonton haven’t stood up for their city and that we haven’t fought appropriately and that we’re turning our backs on the city of Edmont on, and nothi ng could be further from the truth. In fact, members of this Legislature from the city of Edmonton went to the boundaries commission. Our constitu- ency associations made representations to the boundaries commis- sion.

In fact, when the interim report came out and the mayor of this city was exhorting citizens to call their MLAs, I spoke to the mayor and said: if you’re going to enga ge in a campaign relative to this, now is the time to do it, prior to the final report being completed and the final h earings, and to encoura ge Edm ontonians to go to the second round of hearings and to give the commission their views on the report. Unfortunately, they chose to hold off that process until the final re port came in at a t ime when there w as very little t hat could be accomplished from that stage.

Even the submission that was made by the city of Edmonton to the boundaries commission was based more on the concept of a loss of face and a loss of place for the city than on actual numbers. In fact, in looking at it, there were not actual numbers given to the commis- sion to show that the growth of the city somehow outpaced growth in other areas and substantiated an argument for keeping the seat.

So I just wanted to add those comments to the record prior to this bill being passed for second reading because I feel that it’s always a very emotional subject when you’re talking about representation; it’s always a very difficult subject. Each of us in this House know our communities exceedingly well and, when asked, would know exactly where to draw bounda ries for at least our particular area. I’m not talking about in self-interest here; I’m talking about in the interests of our communities.

Each and ev ery one of us, w hether on the government side or the opposition side or the third party, interrelate with our communities, know our communities well, know how they interrelate with each other and could in fact be the best authors of boundaries relativ e to our com munities with no self-interest involved.

When it comes to putting all of those communities together into the larger map, w hether it be of the c ity or the p rovince, that becomes a much more difficult task, and I can tell you that over the last two months I’ve had that task of trying to deal with issues and anomalies out of the report, and it’s not an easy task to be able to try and put those tog ether.

So ha ving the exper ience in th e last two months in dealing with, as I say, some of the anomalies in the report, I h ave a m uch greate r apprecia tion now f or the job w hich the commission had to go through in holding the two sets of hearings, hearing the ma ny div erse view s that w ere brought to them, a nd trying to draw maps that make sense. Mr. Speaker, I’d ask that the Hous e approve this act for second reading. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Governme nt House Leader works pretty hard to innoculate himself against any political damage that may fall out of being the ringleader of pushing this bill through the Legislature.

To say that rejecting the original report or rejecting this bill and then having a new commission assigned would not actually br ing forward a dif ferent result is to prejudge people whom we would all expect to be very competent at doing their job and taking a look at the boundaries given the discussion we’ve had on the motion that passed against our wishes in this Legislature and a new bill that we would see being brought forward. We are very concerned with this bill. We do not like it. We do not like one bit of it. With t hat i n mi nd, Mr. Speaker, I will now put forward an amendment.

The Speaker: Please proceed. Ms Carlso n: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The amendment is that second reading of Bill 42, Electoral Divisions Act, be amended by deleting all the w ords afte r the wor d “that” a nd substituting the following: “Bill 42, Ele ctoral Div isions Ac t, be not now read a second time but that it be read a second time this day si x months hence.” Mr. Speaker, we think that six months will give this government the opportunity to see that this bill is completely flawed and that it did not meet the original mandate, the directions given to it, or the wishes of the people of the province.

The three major flaws with the bill are that first of all comm on community interests and exi sting community boundaries were not met in the recommendation brought forward by the commission and not met in this bill, that the matrix used to make all the decisions was flawed, and, most importantly, all of the concerns that were read into the record regarding gerryman- dering. 3:50 We have to remember in politics that the perception of what is happening can be as important as the reality, and this was addressed by the Government House Leader in his original comments on this particular bill on April 8 in Hansard where he stated: In fact, we se parate ourse lves logically and realistically from redrawing boundaries and give it to a co mmission because in th e history of parliamentary democracy there have been accusations of gerrymandering when governments or L egislatures or indiv idual members of L egislatures a ttempted to draw their own boun dary lines for themselves.

What do we see falling out of thi s particular bill when it comes into the Leg islature but the Gov ernment House Le ader act ively involved in the ver y thing that he said he wouldn’t do and that he sent out a commission to do. He has actively involved himself in the process. In fac t, for the past sev eral w eeks w e have s een him running around in common sight, huddled over boundary maps with various members of this Legislature deciding exactly w here they want these new boundaries to be.

Now, even before this happene d, we saw government members themselves – i n fact, it was t he Minister of Interna tional and Intergovernmental Relations, who said on April 8 as well: now, Mr. Speaker . . . Mr. Hancock: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader.

1632 Alberta Hansard May 13, 2003 Point of Order Imputing Motives Mr. Hancock: Thank you. Under

section 23 the member has just made an allegation against a member, which is (h), and (i), imputed false motives. The hon. member w ell knows that I have not been going around gerrymandering boundaries, that I’ve talked with all members of the House or their representatives through the Ho use leaders putting forward a process by which amendments to this bill can be handled in a decent manner, respectful of the process and not one of gerrymandering o r doing t he thin gs that she’s suggesting. She’s imputing false motives to me, and it’s absolutely scandalous. [interjections] The Speaker: Okay, everybody.

Settle down. This is a p oint o f order. I will recognize first the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie and then the hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands on the point of order. Ms Carlson: Yes, Mr. Speaker. If the Governm ent House Leader listened closely to my remarks, I said that the perception of what is happening can be as important as the reality, and in fact if it look s like a duck . . . We have seen him repeatedly in this Legislature over the past wee k with t he ma p spread out ov er his des k. In fa ct, in committee the o ther nigh t the chair man cou ldn’t see h im; we couldn’t see the person speaking.

There have been huddles of little meetings in this Legislature for a very long time. If the perception of changing bo undaries – thi s Government House Leader himself stated in this House that politic ians shouldn’t get involved in that process, and that is exac tly what has been happening here. That perception is as important as the reality. There is no point of order. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I think that on this point I’m going to take the side of the Government Hous e Leader because I believe that he has been carrying out adjustments accord- ing to a set of principles that are quite principled, and I believe that he has done that fairly and equitably to all parties in the House. I’ve seen no attempt on his part to advantage his party at the expense at least of ours. I don’t know of his work with the Liberal opposition, whether or not he’s huddled with them over their boundaries or not, but I certainly have seen no indication that the minister is engaged in gerrymandering.

The Speaker: I want to remind all members that we’re currently in second reading of Bill 42, Electoral Divisions Act. I have the bill in front of me. The bill is simply a technical b ill with respect to the geographic location of boundaries. That’s the bill. Secondly, we currently have before us an amendment which is a hoist amendment, and there’s a certain procedure with respect to a hoist amendment. The amendment says, “. . . be not now read a second time but that it be read a s econd time this day six months hence.” So I’m going to confine the debate to the amendment.

I’m going to confine it b ecause t his Assembly has already had an opportunity to discuss the motion that came out of an independently adjudicated board that has basically presented to t he Assembly a report. As a result of

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20030513
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L25 S3 20030513 1330 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	29453193675f4c8dd4e4e67fdb2ccd16ba2700b4

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