LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Thursday, April 6, 1972 2:30 p.m. (The House met at 2:30 pm.) PRAYERS (Mr. Speaker in the Chair.) head: NOTICES OF MOTION Select Committee on CensorshipMR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask leave of the House to give oral notice of a motion which I propose to move tomorrow in the House. It is a motion which I would like to read setting up the Select Committee of this Assembly regarding the censorship issue. It is a motion moved by myself and seconded by the hon. Mr. Schmid:

Be it resolved that a Select Committee of this Assembly be established consisting of the following members: Chairman: Mr. Jamison Members: Hon. C.M. Leitch, Attorney General Frank Appleby John Ashton Arthur Dixon Nick Fluker Doug Miller Bill Purdy Ralph Sorenson with the following instructions: (

a) to review in all its forms the existing Alberta legislation and practices related to censorship; (

b) to examine generally the policies and principles underlying such legislation and practices; (

c) to make such recommendations regarding the future of censorship in Alberta as the committee deems necessary; (

d) to receive representations and submissions at such times and places and in such form as it deems advisable, and that the said committee shall meet at the call of the chairman and submit their report and recommendations prior to November 15, 1972. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Is there any reason why this type of resolution that contains considerable subject cannot be placed on the Order Paper, or in Votes and Proceedings with the proper 24 hour notice? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1225

23-2 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I believe according to the rules there are two ways in which notice of a motion can be given in the Assembly. One is on the Order Paper which would put notice on the Votes and Proceedings two days prior to the vote, and the other is by oral notice, as has been done today. Insofar as this matter was referred to in the Speech from the Throne, it was felt that it was not such a contentious matter and certainly was within the rules to give notice tomorrow of the fact of the appointment of the committee. MR. TAYLOR: Mr.

Speaker, on the point of order I know that there are two proper methods of notifying the Legislature. Generally, an oral notice is given when there is very little material contained in it and where it would be expected to receive unanimous consent and where there is some reason why it could not have been placed on the Order Paper. I submit that in this type of notice where the terms of reference are highly important, that we have some opportunity to read these and study them before the motion actually comes before the Legislature.

On that point, since the terms of reference are very important, I would think even at the risk of delaying this for a day or so that either it be placed on the Order Paper or that all members receive a copy of it today so that we can give it proper notice and study. MR. HYNDMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, upon being made aware of the concern of members opposite, we'd be prepared to, in effect, provide more notice and send a copy of the proposed resolutions to the hon. members on Monday or Tuesday next week to vote on at that time. head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR. MOORE: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to introduce to you and through you to the members of this Assembly a group of nine young people, together with their leader, from the Debolt Youth Group in my constituency who are seated in the members' gallery. I would like to express my appreciation to them for taking time out during the Easter holidays to view the proceedings of this Assembly. Would they please rise and receive the recognition of the members of this House. DR. PAPROSKI: Mr.

Speaker, I have the privilege of introducing to you three groups who are carrying out valuable activities in my constituency and outside the constituency: (1) the Edmonton Council of Knights of Columbus, Lady of Fatima, under the council chief, Mr. Jim Ellers and the civic cultural counsellor, Mr. Clarence Verhulst. We all know the various activities carried out by the Knights of Columbus. One of the specific activities is sponsoring a Circle of Squire and Squirette groups, who are a youth group carrying out various spiritual, cultural, social, and other activities.

They are also located in the Assembly, and this Circle of Squires group here today is called the G.P. Vanier Circle, 1664, and the Circle of Squirettes is called Circle of Squirettes of Mary, No. 1. I'd like to commend all these groups for carrying out their activities and taking an interest in the legislative process. I'd ask them to rise and be recognized by the House. MR. STROMBERG: Mr. Speaker, through you, may I introduce to the Assembly a group of 4-H Clubs from Strome, Alberta.

We have with us this afternoon the Strome Beef-Dairy Club and the Wavy Lake Beef Club and the dedicated people who have given so much of their time to these Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1226

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-3 young people, their 4-H leaders. Now, last summer, the Squire Clubs of Edmonton were in the Strome area as guests of these two 4-H Clubs. And now, during the Easter recess, the Strome 4-H Clubs will be the guests of the Edmonton Squire clubs. Now will my group please stand and be recognized by this Assembly. MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce to you and to the members of this Legislative Assembly the principal of the non-subsidized language school of the German-Canadian Club of Calgary, Mr. Hans Heller. Mr.

Heller is accompanied by his wife and family, Rosemarie and Peter, today, and they are in your gallery, Mr. Speaker. I would like them now to rise and be recognized. MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce to you and through you to the members of this Assembly 29 members of the Peace River Air Cadet Squadron No. 124, along with their captain and his wife, Captain and Mrs. Black.

The members of the Peace River Air Cadet squadron are in the public gallery and have taken the time during this Easter holiday to be with us and to communicate again in the community affairs of our great community in the Peace country. I ask them now to stand and be recognized. MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce to you and to the members of this Legislature a man sitting in your gallery and a man who has spent a considerable number of years in this House. He is well known to many of us. I refer, of course, to Mr.

Mike Senych, the former MLA for Redwater. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD University Grants MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Advanced Education and ask him if the government followed the practice of establishing university grants at the amount of $91.1 million, contingent upon no increase in tuition fees to university students. MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, I think this is something that should be dealt with in more detail under the estimates. But I could reply to my hon. friend in this way.

That in writing to the Universities Commission at the time I advised them, I think February 24th, of the amount of a grant which I would be prepared to recommend to the House, and in those terms, I expressed the hope that it would not be necessary to raise tuition fees in the coming year. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, supplementary question. Was the same type of correspondence carried out between your office and the Colleges Commission with regard to the amount that you have recommended to the House in that area, $11 million? MR. FOSTER: I don't specifically recall, Mr.

Speaker, whether or not I expressed the same hope with the Colleges Commission. It may be that Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1227

23-4 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 if I did not, I was aware of the tuition fee structure of the colleges, and was aware that they were not, in fact, contemplating any change in the following year. So, if I did not say that, it was for that reason. If you like, I would be happy to check that and report it. NAIT and SAIT Student Fees MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, one last supplementary question. Do the revenue estimates from the Department of Advanced Education anticipate any increase in student tuition fees at NAIT or SAIT? MR. FOSTER: I think, Mr.

Speaker, I now see a good reason why this matter should have waited for the estimates. I would like to check that and report. I believe the answer to that is no, but I don't want that to be taken as a categorical answer. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View, followed by the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview. Unsatisfied Judgment Fund MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Highways. Now that we have compulsory insurance in the province, when can we expect the $1 contribution to the Unsatisfied Judgment Fund to be removed? MR. COPITHORNE: Mr.

Speaker, this actually comes under the Department of the Attorney General, but with his permission, I think I could answer that question. Actually, there will be no change in the $1 Unsatisfied Judgment for at least four to five years. At that time we would be able to reassess it to see if it could be relaxed to a lesser amount or not. As the hon. member is aware, the fund is running at a fair deficit according to the papers I tabled here the other day to a written question that was asked. If the fund were to be self-sufficient, it would, at this time, need to be doubled.

There will always be people coming into the province who are not carrying insurance, and our people within the province will need the fund to wind down the cases that are now before the courts, as well as the case of the No Fault clause in the accidents that would be created by people coming into the province who are not carrying insurance. Energy Resources Conservation Board MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Mines and Minerals.

Is the hon. minister prepared today to report on my question of last week regarding the law firm of McLaws and Company representing both the Government of Alberta as well as Chevron Standard at the recent Energy Resources Conservation Board hearings? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1228

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-5 MR. DICKIE: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have reviewed the situation and am pleased to answer any of the questions specifically that the hon. member would like to direct to me. MR. NOTLEY: A supplementary question then, Mr. Speaker. Is it not true that because one firm would have to bill both parties that it is not customary, indeed that it is a rare occurrence for one firm to take divergent sides on a case? MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. member is asking a question with regard to legal propriety or legal customs, I would suggest that he obtain advice outside the House. MR.

NOTLEY: I will leave that then, Mr. Speaker, and direct this supplementary question again to the hon. minister. It is a question that I raised several weeks ago when I first raised the issue. Is the position then of the Government of Alberta and that of Chevron Standard identical on the question of the increase in the price of natural gas? MR. DICKIE: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report that in respect to the position of Chevron Standard Limited, I did obtain a copy of their submission to the Energy Resources Conservation Board and am pleased to make that available to the hon. member.

In respect to the position of the government, I think we have made that position clear before, that the Alberta government did request the Energy Resources Conservation Board to inquire and investigate the field pricing of natural gas. The Energy Resources Conservation Board called a public hearing and invited submissions. We will receive a copy of those submissions and we will analyze those submissions together with the recommendations from the Energy Resources Conservation Board. After that time we will make our position known. MR. NOTLEY: A supplementary question to the hon. minister.

Did the legal counsel representing the Government of Alberta engage in cross- examination during the hearings? MR. DICKIE: Yes, Mr. Speaker. MR. NOTLEY: A supplementary question then, Mr. Speaker. In view of that, in view of the minister's inability to advise the House whether or not the position of Chevron Standard and the Government of Alberta is identical in relation to the increase of the field price of natural gas, is it not then, unusual that the government would have as their legal counsel a representative from a firm which is also acting on behalf of one of the producers? MR. DICKIE: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I think that question is phrased rather badly, but I would like to answer the question in this respect, to say that after the Energy Resources Conservation Board did call the public hearing, the government did consider its position. The government decided by virtue of the fact that it had requested the Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1229

23-6 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 Energy Resources Conservation Board to conduct this investigation, that it would not present evidence or make a submission, but however decided that it should be represented at the hearing by legal counsel in an observer capacity. It was that position, to have a watching brief or listening in respect to the hearing, and that is the position the government followed. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Lethbridge West followed by the hon. Member for Calgary McCall, and the hon. Member for Calgary Bow. Automobile Licence Fees MR. GRUENWALD: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon.

Minister of Highways. Does your department contemplate reviewing the method presently used to determine the fee for licence plates on private automobiles in the Province of Alberta? MR. COPITHORNE: Well, Mr. Speaker, at this time we are reviewing many of the aspects of the whole department and this would come under that review as well. Whether there will be any change is something that will be decided at the time of the review. MR. GRUENWALD: Supplementary then, hon. minister.

Are you aware then that there are now certain inequities in the fee structure because of new engineering and designing techniques of the automobile manufacturers? MR. COPITHORNE: Yes, Mr. Speaker. In the licencing of all vehicles -- in my own personal opinion -- there are many inequities that I hope to be able to make more even and more administrable. Camrose College Student Funds MR. HO LEM: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. Minister of Advanced Education.

Sir, in view that you have been recently informed of the proposed increase at the Camrose College for foreign students from $400 to $1,400 a year, what does the hon. minister intend to do about this? MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, when the hon. Member for Calgary McCall says that I was made aware of this, this is quite true. The hon. member and I attended a luncheon meeting with some non-Canadian students at the University of Alberta at which time the matter of the foreign student fee structure in the private colleges of Alberta was raised and discussed.

And I think as we all appreciate, the government of this province does in fact provide some funds to certain public colleges. One of those public colleges was specifically referred to. I indicated to the hon. member at that time, and I am quite happy to refer to it again now, that I will be contacting the college to find out the rationale behind this move on their

part in the sense that the proposed increase is quite large. More than that, Mr. Speaker, I am also contacting them with a view to discovering their complete financial operation and they have been quite agreeable to this. They have agreed to provide me with the information. Should the hon. member or the House be interested in going into this in detail I Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1230

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-7 would be very happy to do so, to the extent that it does not breach confidences and I can make the information available. Use of the Prefix Ms. MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Premier. In regard to your typical reply letter tabled on Village Lake Louise last week, was the Ms prefix on the greeting a typographical error or does the government now formally recognize the leading symbol for Women's Liberation? -- [Laughter] -- Mr. Speaker, I am serious.

The Premier's letter very clearly states the prefix before the lady's name Ms. and this is an issue of grave concern around the country these days. Was it a typographical error or were you formally recognizing the symbol? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Pincher Creek-Crowsnest, please. MR. WILSON: A supplementary then, Mr. Speaker. Is the hon.

Premier aware that the government of California state unanimously passed a bill recently, allowing women to register on the voters list using the prefix Ms rather than Mrs. or Miss and the bill is now going to the state senate to allow women to register using any one of the three prefixes? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, in regard to the gravity of the question I think it is a matter I will take under serious advisement, but I would be very cautious to respond in a definitive way without some consultation with the hon. Miss Hunley and the hon. Mrs. Chichak. I will do that later today. Japanese Coal Contracts MR.

DRAIN: I have a question, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. This report that I read that the government is going to intervene directly in the matter of negotiations for coal contracts in Japan - is this correct? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure which government he is referring to and perhaps he could elaborate just a little bit on his question. MR.

DRAIN: In the last Canada Manpower Review there was a notation that said the Alberta government was going to enter directly into negotiations with the Japanese in the matter of coal contracts and I want to know if this is so, and if this is a government position to do this. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I am sure we would like to see the document that he is referring to because I do not know in what context that was stated, so if the hon. member would provide me with a copy I would be happy to give him a reply as quickly as possible. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1231

23-8 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Wainwright, followed by the hon. Member for Stony Plain. MR. RUSTE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. Has he had any meeting with any federal minister relative to the crop damage by migratory water fowl and the federal participation in that? MR. GETTY: No I have not, Mr. Speaker, but I would like to refer the question to the hon. Minister of Agriculture who may be able to shed some light on it. Crop Damage DR. HORNER: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, the hon. member asked that question yesterday with regard to the meeting on migratory bird damage and this comes under the concept of the Minister of Lands and Forests, primarily, although we administer the Wildlife Damage Fund for the Department of Lands and Forests. The Minister of Lands and Forests was notified of the meeting and had some personnel attending it. Prairie Provinces Meetings MR. RUSTE: Mr. Speaker, then a further question. In Hansard it is reported that Mr.

Davis had said, "I have had discussions with the ministers from the prairie provinces", and in the reply by the Minister of Agriculture yesterday he indicated that there was no meeting held on a ministerial level, as was confirmed by the Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs, and I am just at a quandary now because the federal minister said he had met with provincial ministers. Now do we consider ourselves as Albertans and not as a prairie province? DR.

HORNER: Well, I am sure that the hon. member has finally arrived at the fact that he is an Albertan and that, perhaps, he should have been working harder for Alberta in the past. As a matter of fact, the entire question of this meeting -- and if we want it laid out from A to Z for him -- was that with 48 hours' notice they notified the Department of Lands and Forests that the minister was coming to Winnipeg, and that they were going to have a meeting on it.

Neither the Minister of Lands and Forests or myself were available for that meeting but as I said earlier to the hon. member, personnel were at the meeting representing Alberta. MR. RUSTE: Well, a further supplementary question. Do I take it then that Mr. Davis in his answer in the House of Commons was wrong in that he answered that he had had discussions with the ministers from the prairie provinces? DR. HORNER: Well, I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member should be more concerned about what is happening in the Province of Alberta rather than worrying whether Mr. Davis was right or not.

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1232

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-9 MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Stony Plain followed by the hon. Member for Lethbridge East. Weed Cutting Operations MR. PURDY: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. Minister of Lands and Forests. A few weeks ago in the House I asked the hon. Minister of the Environment, with regard to weed cutting operations on Lake Wabamun, and I would like to direct this question to the Minister of Lands and Forests.

In regard to the weed cutting operation on Lake Wabamun would the harvester be available for harvesting operations on Lake Isle, if the weed harvesting operation on Lake Wabamun is completed early this year? DR. WARRACK: Mr. Speaker, the weed harvesting equipment is owned and handled and operated by the Parks Division of the Department of Lands and Forests, and its use in Lake Wabamun is related to the fact that we have the Wabamun Provincial Park there.

It was utilized last year on a full basis and during the time of the summer months it was not possible to do such a complete job of weed cutting as to prevent there being a need for further work this summer. It would remain to be seen how successful they are in using the weed cutting operation in Lake Wabamun in order to ascertain whether it could be spared for other uses. But I might caution at the same time, Mr. Speaker, that were it to be released for other uses in other places besides Lake Wabamun, we would first be considering any needs that we have within provincial park lakes in other locations in Alberta.

MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, if I might expand on this item just a little bit. The weed cutting operations on Lake Wabamun were turned over to Calgary power and the weed cutter that was available to the Department of Lands and Forests, plus one transporter, was turned over for their use this spring and they are buying one more cutter and three more weed transporters and one more loader. They are going to operate on a two-shift basis beginning in May and the weeds will go to an abandoned gravel pit about two miles away from the Wabamun plant.

If in fact, there is additional capacity available, then consideration will be given to using the machinery or equipment on other lakes, but at this particular time it is considered necessary to increase, not only the weed cutting capacity, but as well the transporters and the loaders to handle the Wabamun situation this summer. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. Is Calgary Power using government equipment for this clean-up? MR. YURKO: Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated when I first got up, the existing cutter and one transporter have been loaned to Calgary Power and they will undertake the complete responsibility of weed control in the lake. MR. TAYLOR: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Is the province paying anything to Calgary Power for this or charging rent for the government machine? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1233

23-10 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, I would have to check that, but to my knowledge at this particular time I don’t believe there is a rental charge, they have simply taken over the equipment on a loan basis and are going to maintain the weed harvesting in the lake. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Could the hon. minister tell us why the people of the province should be supplying Calgary Power with equipment at public expense? SOME HON. MEMBERS: What about the Brazeau? What about the Bighorn? MR. TAYLOR: Answer the question! Answer the question!

Don't ease your conscience -- answer the question. MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, I think we, as a province, can consider ourselves to be very fortunate indeed that Calgary Power has recognized the need for this type of service on Lake Wabamun.

After all Calgary Power hasn't been under any real obligation to, in fact, undertake this work and they, through their own volition, have undertaken not only to do what we have been attempting to do in a very unreliable fashion up until this year, but they have undertaken to purchase additional equipment, and as a result undertake a task which is a difficult one at best, and maintain the lake in what we have said we will maintain it, as an area for excellent recreation for the people of the Province of Alberta. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, supplementary to the hon. Minister of Lands and Forests.

What did the machine cost that we are now providing, in turning over to Calgary Power? DR. WARRACK: I would have to accept that on the Order Paper. The information is readily available since the purchase was made under the old administration. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I really wanted the answer from the hon. Minister of Lands and Forests, not the echo from the hon. Minister of Agriculture. AN HON. MEMBER: The echo came all the way from the Brazeau! MR. COOKSON: I would ask the hon. Minister of the Environment what grant was given to Calgary Power by the former government of Alberta? Catelli Lockout MR.

ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Labour. Is your department aware of the lockout at the Catelli Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1234

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-11 Plant in Lethbridge, and if so, what is your department doing to alleviate this situation? DR. HOHOL: Mr. Speaker, we are aware of the lockouts. For a current report on the exact circumstances and our department's involvement, I'd be happy to bring the answer to you tomorrow. Irrigation Rehabilitation MR. BUCKWELL: Mr. Speaker, a question to, I believe, the hon. Minister of the Environment. Yesterday the hon. H.A.

Olson, in speaking to over 300 farmers in Taber, was quoted as saying that 1) he was anxious to complete negotiations regarding the irrigation rehabilitation and, 2) he was concerned with the eight month delay in bringing arrangements to a final agreement. Has the hon. minister made any plans to meet Mr. Marchand and Mr. Olson in this urgent and vital matter? MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, the same question was asked several weeks ago, and I indicated at that time that negotiations were very active at this particular time. It is a case of establishing or solving some technical aspects.

The main problem, as I indicated at that time, was one associated with the terms and conditions under which we would take over the Bow River project. Also, a second point under consideration was a continuing contribution by the federal government to irrigation rehabilitation in southern Alberta. We considered that both of these areas need some resolution before a final contract can, in fact, be resolved. I do want to suggest again that the area is under very active consideration, and the last meeting was held between our officials, I think about a week and a half ago. MR. BUCKWELL: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

As the hon. minister, do you make counter proposals to the federal government to the plan that is already offered to the provincial government? MR. YURKO: Very definitely so, Mr. Speaker. As a matter of fact, we have indicated what our position would be on these two questions and we have indicated to the federal government what this position would be, in fact, and the conditions under which we would be prepared to negotiate these conditions. Grants to Calgary Power While I am up, Mr. Speaker, I think I ought to answer the question raised by the hon. member, Mr. Cookson.

I would like to indicate that the provincial contribution to the Brazeau project was $20 million and to the Bighorn works, the provincial contribution was $5 million or a total of $25 million. MR. BUCKWELL: A further supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. minister. As the Irrigation Projects Association knew the terms and conditions that the federal government was making to the province, did the province then give this information -- this counter proposal -- to the Projects Association to whom it means so much?

It means very little to the rest of the province, but it does mean a great deal to the Projects Association, that they may study it. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1235

23-12 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, the Irrigation Projects Association has had ample opportunity to make their viewpoint known and they have certainly taken that opportunity. They have met with me on, I believe, several occasions and I have had some correspondence from them. So they have had every opportunity to make their representation to us. At this time I would like to suggest that the negotiations are still of a confidential nature and we are not about to divulge them to the Irrigation Projects Association. Grants to Calgary Power (cont.) MR. STROM: Mr.

Speaker, a question to the hon. Minister of the Environment. Did I understand him correctly to say that the government made a contribution of $20 million to the Brazeau Dam? MR. YURKO: My understanding is that it cost the provincial government $20 million in connection with the Brazeau reservoir project. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Tch, tch. MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Is the hon. minister aware of the arrangement other than the point that he is just making? -- [Interjections] -- Mr. Speaker, I want to raise the question again and I feel that it is very important at this point in time.

The House is being left with a misrepresentation and I suggest that the hon. minister ought to give the House more facts than what he is giving at the present time. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. YURKO: I believe I could stand to be corrected in what I said, Mr. Speaker. I believe the actual arrangement was a $20 million dollar interest-free loan that was made by the previous government to Calgary Power in connection with the Brazeau reservoir. In connection with that contract, I believe that they received water for no charges -- it was free water. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to direct a supplementary question to the hon. Minister of Mines and Minerals. In view of the fact that the legal counsel in a listening position at this hearing did conduct cross-examination, can the hon. minister supply the House with any precedent for the government choosing from one firm which is representing another party -- a private party -- at a hearing? Can he supply any precedent to the House for this kind of representation? MR. FARRAN: Mr. Speaker, there is all kinds of innuendo in that question. You called me to order the other day; I believe this is improper.

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1236

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-13 MR. SPEAKER: This is not the type of question which is contemplated within the ambit of citation 171 of Beauchesne, if the hon. member would like to refer to it. The hon. Member for Calgary North Hill, followed by the hon. Member for Drayton Valley and the hon. Member for Wainwright. Removal of RCMP from Magrath MR. FARRAN: Have you been made aware of the threatened removal of the Mounted Police detachment from the town of Magrath? It is a town with an Irish name in the Cardston riding where law and order may be threatened. MR. LEITCH: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I have been told that the RCMP are considering, or are in the process of transferring the office from the Town of Magrath to the City of Lethbridge and I have received that information recently and I'm making inquiries about it. Cost of Grande Cache Power Development MR. ZANDER: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. Minister of the Environment. Could he tell this House how much the former government paid for the power development in the Grande Cache area? MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, I don't really know at this point in time. I'd have to look it up. Replacement of Campsite MR. RUSTE: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Highways. Is any action being taken to replace that portion of the highway campsite located at the junction of Highways 14 and 21? This land was taken due to the expanding of Highway 14 at that point to a four-lane divided highway. Incidently, this is one of the highway campsites that is used extensively. MR. COPITHORNE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't know whether the highway has taken the whole of the campsite or not. I would assume by the question that the hon. member has put forth that perhaps it has.

If it has, there has been no further negotiation in that area to re-establish a compsite at that particular point. MR. RUSTE: A further question to the minister. Would he look into this matter and see if it is not at all possible to expand that one? There is some left of it. MR. COPITHORNE: Mr. Speaker, we will be looking into all of these areas and where a campsite as such has been terminated, we may not necessarily establish another one in that area, but may in some other area at some other point that would supplement and serve the same purpose.

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1237

23—14 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 Removal of Smith-Roles to Alberta MR. SORENSON: Mr. Speaker, a question to the hon. Minister of Industry. Are you aware that the large manufacturing firm of Smith-Roles is planning on leaving Saskatchewan to set up shop in Alberta? MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, I am not. MR. SORENSON: A supplementary question to the minister. If you contact them, or if they should contact you, would you assure us, Mr. Minister that you will recommend to Smith-Roles that they seriously consider moving into one of the less populated areas of the province? MR.

SPEAKER: The question is hypothetical, but if the hon. minister wishes to answer it anyway... MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, I'd be delighted to answer it. Yes, we will certainly do that. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview, followed by the hon. Member for Drumheller, and then the hon. Member for Calgary Bow. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. Minister of Mines and Minerals, free from any insinuations whatsoever. Can the minister cite any precedent for the same firm representing both the government and a private party at hearings? MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. member is striving mightily to get around the fact that he is asking a question of legal advice and legal propriety, which, as I have suggested before, he should seek outside the House. Release of Experienced Workman MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the hon. Minister of Lands and Forests? Was the experienced workman released from your shop in North Edmonton and replaced by an inexperienced workman by direct direction from you as minister? DR. WARRACK: Mr. Speaker, no. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary question.

Can the hon. minister tell us why an experienced workman was released when he was giving satisfactory service and replaced with another man? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1238

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-15 DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Surely this isn't the kind of question that the question period is allocated for. This is the kind of thing that should be brought up in estimates and the hon. member knows it. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, on the point of order, it might not be serious to the hon. Minister of Agriculture who has a job, but it is pretty serious to a man who is conscientiously doing his job and is then released for no reason and replaced with another man. If we are talking about humanity first, let's be humanity first.

I'm simply asking if he does not know about it that he investigate it and that surely is the proper use of the question period. DR. HORNER: The hon. Member for Drumheller, Mr. Speaker, can allow his blood pressure to rise at a moment's notice. Still, the problem isn't that, and he knows very well, being an experienced member of this House, the question he raises now is a matter of opinion and is one of debate, and should properly be raised on estimates of the department of the minister involved. And that is parliamentary procedure, and has been for a long time.

Just because the hon. member wants to make a loud noise about something, it is not necessary for him to really make a farce of the question period in which urgent questions are made. That has nothing to do with the question of whether a man's job is urgent or otherwise. I know the hon. member likes his hearts and flowers speech. But, at the same time, it is a question of whether or not this question period is going to be usable for urgent, public policy matters, and not the kind of thing he is raising right now. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, on the point of order, I am not asking for a matter of opinion.

The hon. member, if he wants to make a speech, chose a very bad item to make a speech about, because there is no substance to what he said, at all. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. There was some suggestion of innuendo in the question, but I would leave it to the hon. minister as to whether he wishes to answer it or not. DR. WARRACK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member did not, in the original question, ask me to investigate it. If he would like to give me the particulars and ask me to investigate it, I would be most happy to do so. MR. TAYLOR: Mr.

Speaker, if the hon. minister was in the House yesterday, he would have heard the whole details when they were properly given. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Shame, shame. DR. WARRACK: Mr. Speaker, I am really sorry I hurt the hon. member's feelings yesterday. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1239

23-16 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 MR. SPEAKER: I believe the hon. Member for Calgary Bow is next. Loss of Harness Racing Tax Income MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Attorney General. What steps, if any, is the government taking to try to preserve the customary tax income from harness racing in Calgary, which now appears, may not be forthcoming this year? MR. LEITCH: I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker, I did not hear the earlier part of the hon. member's question. MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, it has been announced that harness racing may not occur in Calgary this year.

Inasmuch as the Provincial Treasurer received something over $67,000 in taxes last year from this source, I was wondering what steps the government is taking this year to try to preserve or increase that income. MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, the answer seems to me to be one that will appear in the estimates under the department concerned. MR. WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Did the hon. minister receive a brief from Mr. W. E. Finley, president of the Alberta Standardbred Horse Association, with a suggestion as to how that income may be preserved, or at least part of it, through Mr. Millican? MR. LEITCH: Mr.

Speaker, I don't recall that brief. I recall discussions with various people interested in horse racing in Alberta, and I have met with several groups since September 10th, at which time they discussed the take from the money wagered, and we discussed the amount of the tax, but I don't recall meeting with or dealing with any brief specifically dealing with the question of harness racing and the tax on the money bet on harness racing. MR. WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Would the hon. minister like to have a copy of the brief, together with an accompanying letter I received? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.

This is not a question. If the hon. member wishes to offer the hon. minister some documents, he may do it outside the question period. Educational TV MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, I was wondering if the hon. House Leader has the information that he was going to give us in regard to the question on TV. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1240

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-17 MR. HYNDMAN: I will have that by tomorrow, Mr. Speaker. Natural Resource Hearings MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct this question to the hon. Premier. The question of clarification, sir, in your statement last Wednesday on the Natural Resource hearings. It is my understanding that when the tentative position of the government is prepared and a motion is presented to go into the Committee on Public Affairs, Education and Agriculture, at that time, consideration will be given to a cut-off date for organizations making submissions on the royalty issue.

I am wondering if that is a fair assessment of your statement, or whether the government is perhaps considering setting a cut-off date within the next week or so, so that organizations would be able to consider whether they can make submissions or not. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, that is a very reasonable question and one that we have given some consideration to because of the problem of timing that is involved.

On the other hand, it seems to us that it is a matter for the committee to decide, if the reference is made to the committee, and for that reason, having regard to the thoroughly widespread understanding by the public at large that there will be such a hearing, and that the hearing is tentatively scheduled for mid-May, we felt that the wiser course of action was to present our tenative proposals on the matter, have a motion that the proposal be referred to the standing committee and the standing committee, hopefully, could meet very quickly and determine its own terms of reference and guidelines relative to the point that the hon. member raises.

We would hope that this would be done in such a way and quickly enough that there would still be a reasonable amount of time for people to prepare their submissions, although it might have to be a fairly short time for them to express their intention to make a submission, but we, in balance with the difficult timing problem, felt that it should be a matter for the committee itself to resolve. Competence of Practising Physicians MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister of Health and Social Development. It refers to an

article in The Calgary Albertan where the president of the Alberta Medical Association says that it is only a matter of time until practising physicans will have to prove their competence. My first question to the minister is, is this situation serious at the present time? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, the statement of course, is referring to the continuing education program that the doctors have been developing over a period of time, and no doubt plan on continuing. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister.

Would this be one of the matters for study by the Legislative Committee that studies the professions acts? MR. CRAWFORD: I don't see that aspect of it coming into the purview of the committee study but I suppose, Mr. Speaker, when the committee's Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1241

23-18 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 terms of reference are examined by the committee they could literally consider whatever is really relative to their terms of reference but I don't think that would be. Production of Hansard MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the hon. government House Leader? Is the Hansard staff running into some severe difficulties? We are somewhat concerned over the lack of Hansards that we have been receiving and I am wondering if there is some difficulty or some explanation for it. MR. HYNDMAN: Yes, I will certainly look into that Mr. Speaker.

I think the concern has been evident on both sides. I gather that there have been some personnel problems in getting adequate people to get the start-up going and also in linking in with the government computer for fast publication, but I will certainly check into that through the Speaker and give a report to the House, hopefully tomorrow. Cancellation of Special Use Applications MR. DIXON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Mr.

Minister, have there been any requests by any municipality in the province to cancel the special use applications for development which have been issued for the past year or two but have not been acted upon. Maybe some have gone back as far as four years ago. Is the government contemplating any legislation to take care of this situation at this session? MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I have received no requests from any municipalities in that regard. Gas Pollution at Hussar MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the hon. Minister of the Environment?

Is there anything being done about the heavy pollution, particularly at night, from the GPOG gas well near Hussar? MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, I would have to take that question under advisement and report to the hon. member in a day or so. Task Force On Urbanization MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier. Has there been a firm decision to close out the work of the Task Force on Urbanization? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I refer that question to the hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1242

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-19 MR. RUSSELL: I am sorry I was preparing a follow-up answer to the hon. Member for Calgary Millican and I did not catch your question. Would you mind repeating it? MR. FRENCH: Maybe, Mr. Speaker, I should say I received a petition, a resolution from various communities, and I think this question should be directed to the Premier. Communities of Trochu, Three Hills, Acme, Carbon, Rockyford, Standard, Hussar, Bassano, East Coulee, Wayne, Rosedale, Drumheller, Hanna, Delia and Morrin.

This resolution requests an extension of one year for the Task Force on Urbanization so they may complete their work. My question is to the Premier - have you received this resolution, sir? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I do not have the personal knowledge of having received it yet. I will make an inquiry to determine whether I have received it, but perhaps the minister would like to respond and give an updated report with regard to the status of the Task Force on Urbanization. MR. RUSSELL: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I think it is important to attempt to clarify this, because the work of the Task Force on Urbanization and the Future will continue for another two complete fiscal years to finish the three year program as outlined by the previous government. All that has been changed is the method of conducting the work for the last two years.

The member may recall that during the first year a number of committees working on rather an experimental basis carried out this work, and we have essentially asked the committees to bring their work to a halt, and in their place have appointed a permanent co- ordinator who will ask agencies from the private sector to carry out various specific projects as he sees fit. But the committees have had their terms extended until the end of June of this year, rather than the end of the just past fiscal year, at their request.

So I think the important thing to remember is that the work is being carried out over the next two fiscal years. Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet, it occurred to me after I sat down, in response to the question from the Member for Calgary Millican, there was more or less an indirect request along the line you mentioned from the City of Calgary who submitted a resolution to the 1971 convention of the Alberta Municipalities Association and that association passed that, and that in turn was passed on to the government, so indirectly we did have that request from the City of Calgary. MR.

FRENCH: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the minister. Are you satisfied with the work of the committee up to this point in time? MR. RUSSELL: Not completely, Mr. Speaker, and this was one of the reasons for the change. MR. FRENCH: A supplementary question to the minister. Are you aware of the fact that there are many, many people in rural Alberta today who have spent considerable time at their own expense and time in trying to serve the purpose for which this committee was set up ? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1243

23-20 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 MR. RUSSELL: Yes, Mr. Speaker, and the member is making an excellent point. This is why the three month extension was agreed to at the request of the committees, in order to essentially complete this work that had been started. I indicated earlier that I was not completely satisfied with the way things have been going, as a result of feedback we were getting from various municipalaties and through the board of directors of the Task Force, and this change in direction is an attempt to keep going what, we think, was an essentially good idea. MR.

FRENCH: A final supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the minister. Are you prepared to reconsider your position to close out the work that this group has been doing so that they may be able to complete their task? MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I should emphasize that there has been no decision to close out, and I repeat again that the three months extension and a sum of approximately $61,000 was allotted in this year's estimates to accomplish the very thing the hon. member is referring to. For the two year period beyond that we want to go into the final stages and additional work.

But the community work that has been carried out will be incorporated in final reports which I expect to receive at the end of June. So I do not believe that there has been any wasted citizen effort. MR. SPEAKER: We have fairly extensively exceeded the allotted time for the Question Period and perhaps the matter could be left over for the next Question Period. ORDERS OF THE DAY head: MINISTERIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS DR. HOHOL: Mr. Speaker, I had an important question from the hon. Member for Calgary Bow.

He drew to my attention an advertisement in the Calgary Albertan which had been placed by a firm from Great Britain, indicating summer jobs available for students in the United States and inviting students to apply for them. I wish to inform you, sir, and the members, and the House, that I have instructed my department to conduct a complete and immediate investigation into all the circumstances surrounding this advertisement and the validity of the information it contains. We feel it is extremely important that students not be exploited, if this happens to be the case.

In this connection I am advised that the matter is already under review, both here as well as in the United States and, in fact, in Great Britain, by our own Canadian Federal Immigration officials and officials of the American State Department. The management of the Calgary Albertan, I am happy to report, indicates that the advertisement will not run again until the situation has been clarified, and to that extent we will work to clarify the situation and to bring full information to the House.

My department will consider any necessary further action in this regard because the Department of Labour issues the permits for advertisements in Alberta. When the investigation is complete I will report again. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1244

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-21 I should point out that a similar ad has run in Bermuda, Australia, Africa and, indeed, all over the world. The ad was placed by what appears to be a reputable agency and this is what we want to establish. I thought this was information important enough to bring to the House this afternoon. MR. WERRY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise at this point and set the House in order, and especially the hon. Member for Drumheller, with regard to the borrowings that AGT will be making during the calendar year 1972 in the amount of $50 million.

The hon. member indicated, I think, that this would be repaid by the taxpayers of the Province of Alberta, which is not correct. The $50 million will be used to pay, in Fart, for the capital expenditures required by AGT this year in the amount of $84 million, and this amount will be repaid by telephone subscribers. And if you want to work that down over 20 years of the debenture borrowings, it will come down to less than $5 per telephone per year.

The number of telephones at this point in time are in excess of 556,000, so that individual Albertans will not be repaying the $50 million, and the cost will be repaid out of the rate of return that is allowed to Alberta Government Telephones. MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if we might revert to introduction of visitors. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. STROM: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to introduce to you and draw to the attention of the members of the House, the attendance of a man in your gallery who spent many, many years in this House and I am sure made a very valuable contribution to the development of the north country. I refer to the former hon. member hon. Mr. Ira McLaughlin, from Grande Prairie. I would ask him to stand and be recognized at this time. head: QUESTIONS 158. Mr. Notley asked the government the following question: 1.

Do the 140 people against whom judgments in District Court have been filed for non-payment of Medicare premiums represent all of the people who are in arrears and have the ability to pay? 2. If not, why have judgments been filed against some people who are able to pay and not others, and by what criteria were they selected? MISS HUNLEY: Mr. Speaker, I request that Question 158 be held, I wish to obtain a legal opinion and I am a little concerned about confidentiality of records. MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. minister wish to have it put over without date or to a certain date?

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1245

23-22 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 MISS HUNLEY: I don't think it will take very long but I am just not prepared this afternoon. MR. SPEAKER: Would the hon. minister like to suggest a time so that we can -- MISS HUNLEY: Next Tuesday. MR. SPEAKER: Do the hon. members agree to the matter going over until next Tuesday? I didn't want to appear persistent but it seemed to me that in order to deal with the matter in an orderly way we would have to do this. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. 159. Mr. Notley asked the government the following question: 1. Why did the appeal hearing of Dr.

John Jenkins, suspended as a psychiatrist at the Oliver Hospital last March, 1971, last more than eight months, and why was it never completed? 2. Why was Dr. Jenkins never allowed to testify? 3. Was he forced to accept a government settlement because of the long delay during which he could not collect his salary? 4. Why is he now being evicted from his home by the Alberta Housing Corporation? 5. How many other appeals have exceeded more than eight months before settlement is reached? 6.

What does the government plan to do in the future to ensure speedy appeals to ensure employees are not forced to accept settlements because of financial problems that result from lengthy suspensions? DR. HORNER: I rise in regard to this question as I did the other day to ask the hon. member if he would consider withdrawing the question as it is now structured and to restructure it to protect the confidentiality of personal documents of everybody and particularly the individual named.

I'd like to suggest to the hon. member that in some of these cases, perhaps he could get the information by a personal visit to the minister or some other method rather than having them made public documents because I do think that in consideration of the matter of confidentiality of documents that we have a pretty grave responsibility in this Legislature in relation to tabling these kind of documents. Further, Mr.

Speaker, if I might suggest, in addition to that, perhaps to relieve the conscience of some of us who are very concerned about this matter, that the consent of the person so named in the question should be made available in relation to these matters. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, just in response to the hon. minister's position. First of all I would certainly have the consent of the individual Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1246

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-23 involved in submitting this question. However, I am prepared to rephrase it if it is of concern to the government but I do want to make it clear to the Assembly that I sought the consent of the individual before posing the question. MR. SPEAKER: I take it then that at the present we may take the question as having been withdrawn subject to it being rephrased and reput. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: MOTIONS FOR A RETURN 160. Mr. Notley proposed the following motion to this Assembly: Seconded by Mr. Ludwig. That an Order of the Assembly do issue for a Return showing: 1. In regard to the Government Grazing Reserve at Wanham, Albera: (

a) What is the total acreage of the reserve? (

b) What is the total improved acreage? (

c) What is the total cost of improvements for the past four years (1968, 1969, 1970, 1971)? (

d) What is the amount and cost of fertilizer used in each of the past four years? (

e) What was the cost of spreading the fertilizer in each of the past four years? (

f) What is the assessed value and annual tax of the reserve? (

g) What is the manager's current annual salary? (

h) How much has been paid out in wages for employees other than the manager in each of the past four years? [The motion was carried without debate or dissent.] DR. WARRACK: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to table the answer to Motion 160. 161. Mr. Taylor proposed the following motion to this Assembly: Seconded by Mr. French. That an Order of the Assembly do issue for a Return showing: 1. How many students in the Bow Valley region did not return to school following the end of the Teachers' strike last December? 2. What are the ages of the said students? 3.

What grade had each student fully completed as at December 1, 1971? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, concerning this motion, I might point out that the Department of Education in the normal course of events takes only one count of pupils each year and this is taken on September 30th. However, in 1971 in December, we did take a second count of students, but they were high school students only, so I think it can fairly be said that some of the information which the hon. gentleman requests may be and is in the department, but other information is available and attainable only from School Boards or schools.

I can say that we would be able to provide statements showing for each school system in the Bow Valley area, a consolidation of the Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1247

23-24 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 enrolment as at September 30th, 1971, by schools, and a consolidation of the schools and also a worksheet showing the enrolments as at December 1971 for each of the schools affected, the high school students only. Now that is the only information we have, but we would be happy to provide that and in order to facilitate it I'd like to move an amendment, Mr. Speaker, seconded by the hon. Mr.

Miniely, that the motion be amended by adding immediately after the words that an order of the Assembly do issue for the return showing', the following words, 'copies of reports or statements in the file of the Department of Education regarding the following', and this could relate to the three items referred to in the resolution -- if that is acceptable. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, that is acceptable. I wonder if I could ask the hon. minister if that would include the students who are on the semester system? MR. HYNDMAN: I'm not sure, Mr. Speaker.

If that information is available, we would certainly include it, and I'll make a note of it at this time. MR. SPEAKER: Taking the amendment as read, do you all agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. [Motion 161 as amended was carried without further debate.] head: MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS Driver Education (Adjourned Debate) MR. DIXON: Mr. Speaker, it has been some time since this Motion was before the House and so in order that we'll give the people in the House and those in the gallery an opportunity to know what we are discussing, the Motion reads. Moved by the hon. member, Mr.

Hansen and seconded by the hon. member Mr. Appleby.

Be it resolved that the Government of Alberta give consideration to driver education in Alberta schools being rapidly expanded to all parts of the province. I believe that any motion that has anything to do with the improvement of safety on our highways and streets, of course, is an excellent motion. I would like to congratulate the two members opposite for bringing this motion before the House and giving this House the opportunity to debate such a motion with the idea of encouraging further development in driver education in our province.

The members opposite may be quite interested in knowing that the man who originally promoted driver education in Alberta was a Conservative MLA from Calgary by the name of H. B. Macdonald. He pioneered the idea of driver training in schools when he was president of the Alberta Safety Council some number of years ago. I remember at the time, when he brought it into the Legislature, that there was a great deal of opposition to his program, in particular by some of our daily newspapers.

I believe the fact was that it was such a new program that it was hard to fathom why we should have Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1248

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-25 driver education rather than the ABC's of the ordinary education as we know it. So I think that Mr. Macdonald had a vision that many other people did not seem to have at the time. He saw the vision of the great need for safety on our streets and highways, and in particular by training our young people in the safe methods of driving. It was not an easy program to implement, because right away people had ideas, and particularly school trustees, that it was going to be a costly program and therefore, on that reason alone, they were hesitant to promote it.

I would like to say that over the years the program was accepted, and I would like to congratulate the previous administration and in particular, out Minister of Education at that time, who recommended driver training be implemented in Alberta schools. I would also like to congratulate the insurance companies and the school boards, and in particular the car manufacturers who, I feel, have gone a long way towards encouraging driver education in schools. The hon. minister, Mr.

Dickie, of course, will realize that the Chrysler Corporation, General Motors, Ford, American Motors, and the major car companies have consistently supported the program and have donated time and money towards the success of the driver education program in each province of Canada and in many states of the United States. Just as recently as last week most members received from General Motors Corporation a driver education digest which is a further effort by General Motors in the field of driver education.

Alberta has made a good start in the driver education field, but it has been slow in spreading to the other parts of our province outside of our major cities. Saskatchewan has had a program which I feel has been superior to ours as far as getting it across to the whole province -- all the pupils in the province. The driver education program has been going in Saskatchwan for ten years. The Saskatchewan government subsidizes the program $25 for each student graduated from an accredited driver education course.

The student is asked to contribute to the program which I think is a real good idea, because if students have a financial stake in the program they are not so liable to drop out of the program as if they didn't. So I think the students should be encouraged to not only take part, but also to help contribute to the costs of the program. The contribution in Saskatchewan is adjusted for low income areas -- and I was thinking of the Metis areas and other areas where the student may be hard pressed for money and it can be adjusted -- but by and large, he is asked to contribute a certain amount to the program.

Another good part of the Saskatchewan plan is that private enterprise is allowed to participate in the plan. Savings have been made. Rather than the school board operating the program, private enterprise in many parts of Saskatchewan operate the program and savings have been obtained. Another thing they have in Saskatchewan is the fact that all students graduating are tested by the Highway Traffic Board which adds to the success of the program. In other words, a student has to pass this test before he or she is qualified to receive a certificate as having passed the test.

Good driver education courses pay dividends in many ways, in lower insurance premiums which is a monetary advantage to driver education programs, but most important in my opinion is the early education of young drivers, in particular in attitude and responsibilty. These are so important, I believe, in good driving practices. Many times we speak of driver education and refer only to the automobile, but in 1972 we have many other vehicles where we need Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1249

23-26 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 driver education. I'm thinking of the great increase that we are facing on our highways as far as motorcycles and scooters are concerned, also bicycles and snowmobiles. I know hon. members if they have read the local newspapers at all recently will have seen quite an increase in bicycle accidents. We had one fatal accident as recently as three days ago in our City of Calgary. And I think we should concentrate in this field of safe driving to a greater degree than we are as far as the bicycle is concerned, and the scooter.

Traffic accidents take a terrific toll in property, injury and death in our province and I was so pleased to hear the hon. the Attorney General in his budget debate refer to the interest that his department has in helping to promote the driver education and safety as far as law enforcement is concerned in our province. In 1971 in our province, there were 435 people killed and over 11,000 people injured in automobile accidents on Alberta highways and streets. The figures though are unimpressive until it is realized that each of those statistics could represent a member of one's family or a close associate.

We read many times of accidents, but really I wonder sometimes whether we don't have in a great deal of concern unless we happen to know the person who was injured or killed; then we seem to take a greater interest in safety. So it's not an easy program to sell, but it's certainly a worthwhile program to sell. As we enter the new year of 1972, I thought I might like to refer the hon. members to the month of January in 1972. Accidents are up 13 per cent, injuries are up 11 per cent and fatalities are up 30 per cent.

To date we've had over $3 million worth of property damage attributable to automobile and truck accidents since the first of the year. The purpose of the motion we are debating today is a worthy and vital one which will be a factor in reducing the accident toll among our young drivers and is worthy of the unanimous support of this Legislature. One of the major problems facing society today is that of keeping motor vehicles moving with maximum efficiency and safety on our increasingly complex network of streets and highways.

In Canada the volume of this traffic is increasing by 250,000 vehicles annually, indicating that we may expect a greater density of vehicles travelling a greater number of miles with each passing year. The number of drivers is also increasing. Our problem in the future will become more acute, since it is impossible, for numerous reasons, to expect the number of miles of highway constructed to keep pace with the two other increasing factors. Assuming that highways could be maintained to allow a flow of non-congested traffic, our streets and highways will never be any safer than the drivers who use them.

The major problem, then, centres around the education of the man behind the wheel. The task that lies before us is to educate future drivers and, if possible, to re-educate the older drivers. Driver education and training has been acclaimed as a vital factor in reducing the accident toll among young drivers. In several controlled studies, the reduction is estimated to be as much as one-half, while other studies vary between a low of 30 per cent and a high of 60 per cent. The significant issue in all studies, however, is that they agree on one factor.

Driver education can and does reduce accidents by a considerable margin. The main question, therefore, appears to be not whether we can afford to have driver education, but whether we can afford not to have driver education. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. GRUENWALD: Mr. Speaker, I would like to get my two cents worth in on this driver education motion. I think it is a very worthy motion in its own right. I believe in driver education. I believe in every type of education, as a matter of fact.

I'm certainly not going to split hairs as to driver education or driver training, as has been brought Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1250

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-27 out from time to time in the debate when it was on the floor the first time. The area I would like to zero in on, Mr. Speaker, is the area that was touched on by my hon. friend to my right, the hon. Member for Cardston. That is, on attitude. Herein lies, I think, the whole solution to driver education. You cannot teach attitudes in six, eight or 12 or even 24 weeks, or almost any short period like that. This is what is important. Because attitudes, Mr. Speaker, are a way of life.

They must be developed all through the school years, throughout the entire curriculum, and also in the home, of course. We have to teach our children to be concerned for other people and other things. If we can get enough people concerned about the other fellow, then we don’t have to worry about ourselves. When I say this has to be done throughout the whole school program, throughout the total curriculum, I am really serious about that. I think it has to start in Grade I, not in Grade IX about the time the child reaches age 16. This is far too late.

If the attitudes are not developed at that time for consideration for other people and other things, I submit to you, that all the training in the world is not going to solve the problem we hope that it will. I can take English, science, social studies, phsychology, enterprise, I can even take reading. You can teach attitudes because it is in the selection, it’s the approach you take to these types of things, the kind of material a student reads that impresses their young minds. I Ihink this is the area in which we have to put real emphasis in our total educational program.

We must worry about, as I mentioned earlier, if there is some way we can observe and improve the relationships of our students to other people and I mean even student to student. How does a Grade IX student react to a Grade II or Grade III student? In other words, when you have this age differential, at this time, do they really consider they are also important people? I think this is extremely important when we talk about attitudes towards one another. We have to be concerned, our schools have to be concerned, about action and interaction between students and teachers. Is there a real respect there?

Is there a discipline they really respect there? How about students to their own student government? In junior high certainly they have a type of student government which can be of value in teaching attitudes which will reflect and carry on and show on these students throughout their entire lives. If they are not prepared to respect their own student governments, their own self-imposed rules and regulations, I think it's a hopeless case to think that in three months, six months, or even a whole year's driving training program, they will respect other people and even government laws.

I think these are some of the things that are extremely important and they must be brought out so that we can get responsibility and a good attitude for our students throughout their entire school years. If we can get respect for authority, if we can get values, if we can get discipline and obedience to unenforcable laws -- this is another thing that is very important -- don't forget that there is another person out there who has to be looked after.

It is so easy; I could drive around any block in almost any city, I could cause an accident without being legally at fault, just because I wouldn't care about the other person. So I think if we can get into our schools good citizenship, this is really what we do, Mr. Speaker. This can only be done through a safety orientated and a considerate attitude by people toward others. Now through education, in the way that I have tried to put it across, hopefully we can inculcate into our young people a concern for the safety and consideration of others.

Now if this can be done, and I submit that it just must be if we are going to get anyplace, it might well be then that driver education, as we usually think about it, would be much better off and would be better put into the hands Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1251

23-28 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 of private enterprise. If we can get these attitudes squared away, then maybe the motor clubs, the driving clubs would do this on a private basis, would do the job just as well, maybe even better, and certainly more economically than we could do it in our schools. Because I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, and I won't go into this into any depth, there is a limit to the number of programs that are marginal -- whether academic or not -- that should be going into our school systems as a whole.

Because I can assure you that when we start putting a program like this into our schools and buying simulators and all this type of thing, which I have seen on display and which is supposed to be one of the great aids in this type of a program, the cost of education again is going to go up and up and up. So, with this in mind, I would say that driver education is good, but let us be careful how far we involve ourselves in it as a school system. MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, in rising to add a few words on this particular matter, if the hon. member from Rocky Mountain House weren't in the House, and I see that the female page girls are not here, I would tell the story, of the comparison between a speech and a lady's dress, that the speech should be long enough to cover the subject but short enough to be interesting, but I can’t very well tell the story with the hon. member being here. But hopefully, my remarks will fit into the category of at least being short. I think four point should be made with regard to driver education.

I don't question the motives of the hon. member who moved the motion nor the members who have spoken on the matter. But the portion of the resolution which does give me just a bit of concern is that part that says "rapidly expand in all portions of the province". I think, Mr. Speaker, that if we are going to become involved in rapidly expanding the program in all areas of the province, then obviously this is done by one of two ways. Either we do it by compulsion, and we take it out of the area of options altogether, and the thing is done on a mandatory basis.

It must be done, it must be one of those things that are done in the school system. The other way, of course, is to offer the carrot. And the carrot that has generally been offered has been the carrot of "if a school board will do this," the government will give then 50 cents or 75 cents or 45 cents on the dollar. And it seems to me, that all members of the House would likely agree. This is a pretty crude way of establishing what needs to be done in the school system or how much money you can get out of the Department of Education irregardless of who the government is. So, I suspect Mr.

Speaker, that whether we use the compulsion or whether we use the carrot, I am not so sure that we want driver education on an across-the-province basis to the extent that we go in either of these two directions, that we make it mandatory or, in fact, if we get involved in a system of giving grants to schoool boards who become involved in driver education; I would support either of those approaches. The third point that I would make is that it gets back to the matter that I have touched on one or two other occasions in this House this session, and it becomes a matter of who really controls education.

If the department, or if the government, or if the legislature is going to make driver education mandatory, then of course, this asks some of the very same questions all over again about who is really making the decisions in the field of education. Is it the legislature, is it the department, or in fact, is it local school systems? And the last thing that I think we must all keep in mind when we are batting this matter around is how far does the education system go in provinding social services or picking up social responsibilities in the community?

We look back over the past 10 years and see the numbers of programs that have been added for good, Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1252

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-29 sincere, genuine reasons, the numbers of programs that have been added for credits and some non-credit courses, in the Grade I to XII system in this province. You will be quite surprised at the growth, whether it is driver education, whether it is family life education or whether it is a number of other programs that we have got involved in.

Some place along the road, someone -- and I suspect it will be this Legislature, along with teachers and school trustees and the public at large in this province -- is going to have to decide how far we are prepared to go to have the education system pick up many of the responsibilities that previously were carried on by other groups, namely the family and local communities. I trust that those people who will be involved in making that decision -- I hope they are pretty good drivers, because from where I sit, or perhaps I should say, from where I stand, I see some rather dangerous signs.

To bring it back into this discussion, I see some red lights.

If the Department of Education, or education in general, is going to continue to provide additional services in areas where people would like to opt out -- if we continue to pick up these kinds of responsibilities in education over the next 10 to 15 years, at the rate we have had in the past 10 years, then as far as education costs are concerned and the direction education goes in the future, we had better see some red lights; not only in the area of paying for it, but what this is going to do for responsibility as far as families are concerned, and as far as organizations and local groups across this province.

I am prepared to support the resolution, but let us next year not have another resolution here, saying we should take on some other program and rapidly expand it across the province. At the same time let us please not get involved in making one that is a compulsory program across the province, and secondly let us, for goodness sakes, not get involved in some of the mistakes we have made in the past by offering the school boards, if you will teach driver education on a mandatory or a voluntary basis across your system we will pick up half the cost.

I hope to gosh we are in the stage of education where we are not going to be doing those kinds of things in the future. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before the hon. Member for Bonnyville closes the debate is there anyone else? Please continue. DR. HOHOL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I had not really intended to enter the debate and I am not really debating. I would like to indicate my support for the resolution. I think I share the concerns for the language that the previous speaker did, very rapidly.

However, since the resolution asks for a feasibility study, I backed off from making the same point, because it is likely, though we cannot prejudge this, Mr. Speaker, that the people who do the study might find that a rapid expansion is impossible, and if this is the case this would be very instructive. I think the resolution is timely for the reasons that many people across the province have argued this point for many years, as you well know yourself having served on school boards. The question of cost becomes important, but this is a point of feasibility.

I think we will have this kind of information from the study for use by the Alberta School Trustees' Association, the Alberta Teachers' Association, the businesses and industry. The Legislature will have then in their hands the kind of information on which we can make some value judgments as to whether it is too expensive. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1253

23-30 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 I share the thoughts of the opening speaker this afternoon from Calgary Millican -- that this is not a program that can be too expensive; it is too expensive not to pursue it. It may be however, as the hon. Member for Lethbridge pointed out, too expensive for school boards, and then some kind of sharing with the total community may be in order. I agree entirely that this kind of expense cannot be borne by school boards at this point, but the feasibility study may show something else.

I think that a study of this kind in education costs will assist us to set priorities for the community, for industry, for education, for school boards, and for private citizens to use this kind of information to assist us in making the priorities. It is on this basis that we are looking to a resolution that intends to instruct and assist the Legislature to make the final judgment. I think the case for this kind of study has been very fully -- and to my mind -- properly made. I am convinced and satisfied by the mover, by the seconder, and the afternoon speakers, that the feasibility study is a good one.

By the very nature of the kind of subject we are talking about -- driver training or education -- it can't move too fast, to get the instructional staff, to get the space, to get the programs. In the City of Edmonton I know that the Public School Board has three schools in which we have driver training and education; one an after-school program, two in-school programs. And I don't know, Mr. Speaker, the real meaning of the fact that the two schools in which there is driving education happen to be special education schools, L. Y Cairns and the W. P. Wagner.

The students at Victoria composite High School have access to this kind of instruction during the summer vacation and after school hours. I am not sure, also, that there is a black and white circumstance with respect to who is in charge of education.

I think it is a joint enterprise, and given certain funds and certainly not cost-sharing funds, but given certain funds for education, then the local people will make the judgment as the Edmonton Public School Board made the judgement that it will have this kind of instruction in three schools but not in the other 149 schools, if my memory on the number of schools is accurate. So it is in this spirit, Mr. Speaker, that I would endorse this legislation. MR. BENOIT: Mr.

Speaker, I have no intention of becoming involved because I wasn't here the first night when the resolution was brought up, but with all due respect to the hon. Minister of Manpower and Labour, I now have to rise because the wording of the resolution is important and I see we are about to vote upon it. The Resolution No. 2 on today's Order Paper asks for a feasibility study, but Resolution No. 1, which we are discussing now, asks that the government 'give consideration' to driver education in Alberta.

I recall that for some time we have not been permitted to ask the government to give favourable consideration because that would be in favour of theresolution. Now I don't know how hon. mumbers read it, but giving consideration to driver education may be different than doing a feasibility study on it, and so with that in mind, and considering the fact that we are considering the Alberta schools being rapidly expanded to all parts of the province, this gives me some fear of supporting theresolution.

But I think that enough debate has gone on to give those who will be considering it enough idea of what is concerned, and so probably we can let it go at that. But this is asking for more than just a feasibility study in fact. MR. HANSEN: Mr. Speaker, as I rise to close this debate I will not take very long. I think it has been well spoken on, on both sides of the House, and I would like to thank the members from both sides who have supported it so far.

I would like to bring up to date a few things that I had in my first speech, things that I feel show why we should Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1254

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-31 support this. I think one of themain things was the safety factor, that it would provide safer drivers to the province and to Canada. Also, it would set a standard of driving which everyone would know, and you would know more or less what the other person was doing. This would make driving a lot safer. I would also like to say that the cost which has been brought on during the debate on both sides is very hard to evaluate the cost of such an education and what it is going to save in the long run over the years of less accidents and less insurance.

Now, one of the main things for our young drives, the cost of their insurance, is a real hardship and I think that this driver education would be a great thing to bring insurance costs down. That is another thing, and I believe very strongly that you have to teach these things when they are young. This is why in my first talk on this, I spoke on driver responsibility, also the traffic laws and the habits of driving and your mental attitude.

All these things I believe -- the only time you are going to really teach is when they are young, and it is easier to teach them when they are young than when they get into a habit which is hard to break. This is why I'm asking the whole House if they will support this motion. I don't think I will go into a real long detailed speech on this because I believe it has been covered on both sides very well, so I'm just going to ask the House to support my motion, and thank you very much. [The motion was carried without dissent.] Provincial Power Grid (Adjourned Debate) Moved by Mr. Moore, seconded by Mr. J. Miller:

Be it resolved that the Alberta Government investigate the feasibility of a provincially owned and controlled electric power grid system. MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, several weeks ago I found myself speaking on this resolution somewhat off the cuff as the saying goes, and at that time I found myself speaking about energy resources in general, about our potential in Alberta, about the methods of conversion, about the methods of transmission and distribution, and particularly about the need to manage our energy resources in accord with the wishes of the people of Alberta.

Mr. speaker, today I don't intend to speak too long on this subject, though it is a subject on which one could wax loud and long. And it isn't my intent today to examine the technical aspects of this particular resolution or the technical aspects of a public grid, the pros and cons of such a grid, nor is it my intent, Mr. Speaker, to debate the philosophy of a private grid versus a public grid, or for that matter get into the whole area of discussion regarding private enterprises versus public enterprise. But it is, Mr.

Speaker, my intent to speak today somewhat broadly and politically rather than technically, and before I begin to make my political remarks on this issue, I would like to read the resolution: "Moved by Mr. Moore, seconded by Mr. J. Miller:

Be it resolved that the Alberta Government investigate the feasibility of a provincially owned and controlled electric power grid system." Mr. Speaker, Alberta is very generously endowed with resources - - very generously endowed with mineral resources, and water resources, energy resources, forest resources, and land resources. I Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1255

23-32 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 believe that after having the opportunity to be in government for a few months, I have a realization, or some small degree of realization, of the extent of these resources, and I would like to suggest, Mr. Speaker, that it is my belief that the people of Alberta are quite knowledgeable generally as to the extent of these resources, the work and value and use and distribution of these resources. I believe, Mr.

Speaker, that the fundamental issue before the people of Alberta today is the management of these resources, and the question is, the formula, the formula that is to be used in the management of these resources. This is the central issue before the people of Alberta. It is a vital and critical issue, and I might suggest at this time, Mr. Speaker, that the government of a year ago was rejected by the people of this province and they were rejected primarily on one basis. They were dissatisfied with the manner in which the previous government was managing Alberta's resources.

They were dissatisfied with the formula that in fact was being used. They were dissatisfied with the management of the mineral resources. They were dissatisfied with the management of the water resources. They were dissatisfied with the management of the energy resources; dissatisfied with the management of our forest resources and our land resources. The people of Alberta elected this government on this side almost seven months ago because they felt that we had a new formula, a formula which was different from the formula of the old government, and a formula which I believe is tuned to the realities of today.

This formula that we said, and stated, and reiterated to the people of Alberta was designed to create more jobs, was designed to hold the line on taxation. It was a formula which we felt would reduce misery amongst those Albertans who were incapacitated or who had been bypassed. And it was a formula which we felt and knew and the people thought we knew, would in fact maintain the educational system for our young. And it was also a formula which the people of Alberta felt would maintain a quality environment in which to live. As a result the people of Alberta put their trust in us.

This trust was to manage in their interests these vast resources. Mr. Speaker, it would really be the height of folly if we as a government simply reverted to the old Social Credit formula and simply extended this formula that was sustained by the old government for 36 years, and extended it into the '70's and the '80's. If we did that, Mr. speaker, we would surely deserve being relieved of the trust that the people put in us. I believe that if we did this we would certainly be turfed out at the first opportunity. But, Mr.

Speaker, this government recognizes this trust and this responsibility that it has been given and it has undertaken. And in this recognition it is my belief that it shall carry out this trust. It is my belief that no stone will be left unturned. No alternative will be discarded without close examination. Mr. Speaker, the concept of a publicly owned electrical power grid is just such an alternative, and it must be studied. This resolution says that the Alberta government should investigate the feasibility. Now on what grounds? MR. HENDERSON: Will the hon. minister permit a question? MR YURKO: Mr. Speaker . . .

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1256

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-33 MR. HENDERSON: Is the hon. minister suggesting that there is not already a power grid in the Province of Alberta? MR. YURKO: Well, Mr. Speaker, I thought I was going to be asked an intelligent and very substantial question. But, in fact, I must honestly indicate to the House that when that type of a question is asked, I must indicate that I must continue without paying too much attention to comments coming from the other side of the House. Of course there are power grids -- there are several power grids in Alberta as a matter of fact -- different voltages. AN HON.

MEMBER: Is there a tie? MR. YURKO: There is a tie. Of course we recognize that. Why ask me a stupid question? Mr. Speaker, the Government of Alberta can do no less than accept the challenge of thoroughly examining this alternative. Now there is nothing in this resolution that says it must accept it, that it must do some type of integration. It simply says that we should be examining this particular alternative and one of the justifications for this examination is because basically most of the other provinces in Canada do have a publicly owned grid.

There must obviously be some advantages to a publicly owned grid, and I would suggest that we must examine this alternative for several reasons. The first reason, I would say, is that there appears to be a need for flat-rating power across the province if we are to give substance to halting centralization and reviving the growth of rural Alberta. Cheap power must be provided to our towns and our rural areas if we are to locate industry in these areas. Secondly, I would like to suggest that there is a need to determine the most economical methods of harnessing the potential of our mighty northern flowing rivers.

We must be cognizant of the fact that one-half of the main river flowing north lies within Wood Buffalo Park, and that in order to harness this potential we will have to negotiate with the federal government. Thirdly, we must recognize that our province is a vast exporter of energy and we need to carefully examine the export of electrical energy beyond our borders. It will not be long before we shall be party to negotiations directed towards the establishment of a national grid, so that power can be transferred from one province to the other quite freely.

And fourthly, we shall have to look seriously at the use of our waste coals for fueling very large base load stations which would give Alberta the lowest power costs on this continent. These base load power stations may be tied into commercial complexes for gasification of coal or even in situ processes for extracting bitumin from tar sand. I would like to say at this point that this province is doubly blessed, in that its vast waterways flow northward and thus provide an ideal heat sink for the thermal pollution arising from large base load power stations. What I'm really saying, Mr.

Speaker, is that the new formula of managing the resources of this province that is being instigated by the government of today, the new formula upon which we were elected must and will be based on knowledge -- not on guesswork or emotion, but on knowledge. As a result, Mr. Speaker, if we are to adopt that Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1257

23-34 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 type of a stance, that type of a posture, then we must investigate various alternatives before us. It must be recognized, as I said earlier, that the rest of the provinces do have a publicly owned grid system. There must be reasons for this. Even in the Conservative province of Ontario power is generated, transmitted and distributed through a publicly owned system, and we can do nothing less, Mr. Speaker, than examine this type of alternative for Alberta. In that light, Mr. Speaker, I support this motion. Thank you. MR. HINMAN: Mr. Speaker, I want to get in this debate, too.

I haven’t had a good chance to make a political speech yet. You know, there are lots of

interpretations as to why the old government was turned out and the new one put in. But if I were to divine, I would simply say that once in a while you can fool most of the people. On this occasion, our people were fooled a little bit by extravagant promises. I am going to propose on our side that maybe we should try promising that people can go to heaven no matter how they live. But to get back to the question at hand, I think from my investigations, there would not be one man in 20, if you went out this afternoon, who could give you any idea what the government's formula is for managing resources.

I would go so far as to say that if we examined all the hon. members on the other side, the marks wouldn't be very good. AN HON. MEMBER: Agreed. MR. HINMAN: Another thing I have learned over the years in the House is that the only way you can exceed the stupidity of a question is in the stupidity of the answer. Now, if this resolution is simply to investigate the feasibility of a government-owned power grid, I am going to support it too. I don't know if the time is very ripe for this to happen. I do agree with what the hon. minister said about the potential of our power.

The fact that we do have in the future a very great market for cheap power from Alberta and that it may well be one of our choicest resources. However, when you talk about grids and public ownership, you are talking about two other things. The stupid question was, "Is there now a grid?" And we are all aware that there are grids. The grid serves two purposes, one is to gather the power which many people produce into a system for export or marketing for other purposes. The other is, of course, to distribute that power in the areas where it is needed.

I submit we have the grids, and if Alberta is going to own them it has to be done by a purchase, I hope, or else it has to be done by a take-over, which I would deplore. I think in investigating the possibilities we have to keep these things in mind. The grids we currently have don't gather much power from many sources. They gather it chiefly from Calgary Power, from Northland Utilities; Lethbridge is prepared to put in a little once in a while, and so is Edmonton, and to purchase it back. Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, I should adjourn the debate as the hour is 4:30 p.m. MR.

SPEAKER: Has the hon. member leave to adjourn the debate? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1258

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-35 HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: PUBLIC BILLS AND ORDERS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT ORDERS (Second Reading) Bill No. 200:

An Act To Amend The Legislative Assembly Act (Adjourned Debate) DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, when we were last on this bill I had finished making some preliminary remarks in regard to the question of elections, and I hoped at that time that the hon. Member for Calgary Millican was going to give us the benefit of his great wisdom as to how the former government could have stayed in power until some figure well on into 1973. I never did hear his calculations on that. I would like to hear about how he thought they were so good they should continue ad infinitum. The other point, Mr.

Speaker, that I tried to make originally was that there were some real problems constitutionally with a fixed election date in one province and not in the others, and not federally. I think we have to give some consideration to that. The question, also, as to whether or not the time mentioned in the bill is an appropriate time of the year I think needs also to be discussed. In Alberta, since 1905 we have had a number of dates for an election, most of them have been at a variety of times, but not necessarily in June. Again, the question of whether or not June is the best month, I have some question about.

I have always felt that the best months for elections were in the wintertime and certainly in the farming communities this is when they like to have elections, because they aren't as busy then and they do like to take their politics seriously in rural Alberta, and to get involved. I would like to suggest that if you are going to have a fixed date, we think about a fixed date in March sometime, rather than in June, because it would allow for that kind of discussion that is required. But on overall balance, Mr.

Speaker, I can't support the bill on the grounds, as I pointed out before, that we would have a continual political campaign for the four years, gradually working up to the fixed date that everybody knew was coming. I think it would worsen the atmosphere in the Legislature and wouldn't be helpful in getting the province's business done. Again, I suggested there is a constitutional question in relation to a fixed date in Alberta and not anywhere else, the question of the timing of a fixed date for elections.

I suppose everybody has their various preferences and while I like March somebody else might like August, and so you pick one out of the hat, it doesn't really mean anything. It also means that then you can't refer to the people in the Province of Alberta the important issues, on the basis of an election campaign. I think this would be unfortunate and unwise.

I think that at all times, we shouldn't feel that a we are so all-important in this Legislature that the people in the Province of Alberta can't decide a question better for us, and if necessary by a general election outside of the times designated in any bill. And I think we would be usurping the power of the people of Alberta by having a fixed election date as it is set out in the bill before us.

I really believe that to suggest that if you couldn't go to the electorate on a major issue, and didn't have that choice, would be something that we couldn't decide here, because we are taking away a very important right from the individuals of Alberta, and I would suggest that before you can have this kind of a bill passed, you Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1259

23-36 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 should have a plebiscite on it in a general way, so you don't take away the very important rights of being able to decide important major decisions that are going to affect everyone in Alberta. So for these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I am afraid that should this bill come to a vote, I will be forced to vote against it. MR. FARRAN: Mr. Speaker, I have grave doubts about tampering with the British parliamentary system we have inherited whatever personal opinions might have been expressed by people in high office at various times.

I believe that one opinion is held by a person in high office on that side and now they have changed, and there have been opinions on this side. But certainly the system has grown and has been changed and modified over the centuries since King John signed that Magna Carta on Runnymede Island, but apart from the changes designed to speed up the business of the people, I don't believe the basic framework has reached a point where further modification is desirable. It has been modeled as a fine tool over the centuries and I think we tamper with it at our peril.

Basically, the continuing ship of state is the constitutional monarchy, and our respect for this perpetual keystone of our system makes it unique and it gives us all the well known advantages over a republic. Republics with appointed presidents, elected judges, politically biased armies and police forces with a general legalistic sort of approach to a written constitution. We don't really have a written constitution, maybe we are even talking about changes to the unwritten constitution on a federal level, at the moment.

But I refer you to page 199 in Beauchesne where it points out that the constitution of Canada and its provinces really derive from the practice of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. The BNA Act actually mentions a constitution similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom: "Politicans may come and go but the ship of state under its royal figurehead goes on forever". I think we make a mistake if we do not see ourselves in the context of history in the context of both the past and the future.

It is this concept, that politicans may come and go, while the state rolls on its historical way, that makes me wonder whether this fixed date for elections is even constitutional. Certainly a government may not stay in office more than the five years in normal time. But as I understand it, after an election the leader of a party which holds the majority in the House, seeks the permission of the Queen to form a government. The defeated party traditionally offers its resignation. If a leader holds the confidence of the majority in the House the Queen will naturally call upon him to form a government.

But it is possible if that leader fails to maintain the confidence of the majority, and yet some other person in the Assembly does have the confidence of the majority, the Queen may call upon that other person to form a cabinet without an election. There have been several precedents. I think it has happened several times in history, certainly in recent history there are examples. Some such regrouping must have happened in Britain at the time that Mr. Winston Churchill took over from Neville Chamberlain, early in the Second World War.

I presume that when a national government was formed at the time of the great depression in Britain, with a combination of both sides of the House, that this was done in a similar fashion. Of course, if the government is defeated on a major issue in the House then the proper, traditional outcome is for an election to be called. But there are other circumstances which may persuade a government to offer its resignation, to offer it to the Queen, not the people, and to go to the country for a test of public opinion.

The Queen must be confident, of course, that this Assembly does truly Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1260

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-37 represent the people. One obvious example is when the country is divided over an extremely controversial issue. This may be a question of national emergency or something of extreme economic importance. It could be a general strike, conscription, taking one leaf out of Canadian history. It might even by something as simple as the imposition of a new but very controversial tax. In such a case, I submit, that it would be absolutely proper for a government to seek a renewed mandate from the people.

A more common reason for going back to the people is the emergence of a deadlock through balancing factions in the House as the result of an election. Can you imagine that situation is Newfoundland having to be perpetuated for five years? It is either a stalemate that could happen because the government's majority is too small to give a working majority for orderly government, or because a minority government is in danger of becoming the tool of a small faction that holds a balance of power in the House, and that small faction may not truly represent the majority of the people.

In Newfoundland in the first go-around the member from Labrador emerged in an extremely powerful position. Fortunatley in the second race he received his just desserts from the people. But what a situation it would have been if they had had to continue for five years with that sort of operation. A minority government has the right to try to continue, but surely it must also have the right to go back to the country for a clearer expression of the public will.

Now, finally, there must be the rare possibility of a government confessing that it has failed to cope with some horrendous problem and to offer its resignation on a point of principle -- offer it to the Queen. I mean if it's a free society the government and all the members of the Assembly must have the freedom to throw in the towel, throw in the sponge, if they feel inclined. If this bill became law you just imagine the complications if say, a Premier died or went crazy, or committed some crime and was disbarred from the House.

We might have to -- and you can laugh -- we might have to put up with an ineffective substitute for a number of years, for three or four years maybe. I mean since Canadians are basically fair, if the substitute went back to the people for a mandate, I think they would be fair enough to give him a run. But if he made the mistake of not going back the situation might be a little different. I think the people would resent this and it has been proven a number of times in history -- and even in recent history -- that they resent a substitute continuing without the invitation of the people.

I am not pretending I am Senator Forsey or anything but I would submit that this proposition really violates the basic precept of our system. You can imagine what would happen if for some tactical consideration we happen to go along with this, which I consider would be a strategic mistake. As in the United States, the year before the fixed date, will become a year-long election campaign, where the opposition will obstruct and orderly government would be minimal. I could buy a reform such as half of the reform as suggested by the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview much quicker than I would buy this reform.

The part that I would agree to would be that campaign expenses should be limited by law. The Conservatives set up a commission under Art Smith, former Member for Calgary, and it sat for many years on this question in Ottawa, and they came in with some pretty sensible conclusions. Of course I would never go along with the compulsory disclosure of the source of funds, for I think that would be an intrusion on the confidentiality of the donors, many of whom might give to both sides and may not want to be identified with any party. The second Monday in June -- an extremely bad day anyway, for many reasons.

Well, it's unkind to June brides . . . Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1261

23-38 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 MR. SPEAKER: Would the hon. member please yield the floor until the point of order is stated. MR. HENDERSON: I haven't done so with other speakers, Mr. Speaker, but I think we're debating the principle not the detailed clauses of the particular bill and a lot of the debate which has taken place has been on details, which we have sat and listened to, and which was of interest too. I wonder if the hon. member could speak to the principle of the bill which is elections at fixed dates, not the specific date itself. DR. HORNER: Mr.

Speaker, on the point of order raised by the hon. member, surely when you're fixing a date that is a fairly firm principle in the bill. MR. FARRAN: Well I think it is in order to refer to this date which has been proposed by the hon. member of the opposition isn't it Mr. Speaker? MR. SPEAKER: Well, the hon. member is asking me to draw a line which is so extremely fine I don't think I might be able to draw it. MR. FARRAN: Well, if it's not unkind to the June brides it is certainly unkind to the young voters.

It is unkind to the newspapermen, because it will cut off advertising on a Saturday because we don't have any Sunday papers in this province. It is bad enough to have to go to work on a Monday morning anyway, without having to go to vote. You have to get up early, rush there to get to the polls in time, or rush supper in the evening in order to vote on a Monday. It's unkind to the rural members who would be required to campaign through the seeding season and there might be a few of them who do a bit of early haying in June, it's not a common practice in Alberta, but maybe it should be.

And it's too close to the end of the spring session for any meaningful assessment of new legislation. I believe that this is wrong, you have this year long campaign in the United States and I think this would be a step towards the American system -- and it is not that I am xenophobic and oppose it because it is American, I would oppose it if it was a step towards any republican system. Under the British parliamentary system one of the perogatives left to the Prime Minister or the Premier is to call the date of election at any time with proper statutory notice.

I suppose the opposition, it doesn't matter who is sitting on the opposition side, always resent this tactical advantage that the Premier might have. When they might be on this side they would recognize that there was a small tactical advantage there. It's only a very small one of being able to set the time and the place and I think in history there have been dozens of other reasons for calling an election, and I'm not talking about a non-confidence motion.

So I will vote against this despite the eminent supporters it might have on both sides of the House because I do believe that it is a departure from the well-known unwritten British constitution according to which we have to abide under the BNA Act. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1262

April 6th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 23-39 MR. DIXON: Now, Mr. Speaker, I hadn't intended to get into this debate until the hon. Minister of Agriculture invited me -- he was quite interested in my theory on when the election should be called. And I'm amused too by the hon. member, I mean the hon. minister without responsibility from Calgary North Hill who is making like a Cabinet Minister all the time and trying to tell the front bench how to run their business.

Now the hon. member will recall in recent changes, the elections in this province, we've had a recent change in the Municipal Government Act which allowed for every three years, and I can remember the hon. Member for Calgary North Hill saying; "Don't pay any attention to the senior government, the most important government are the municipal governments." And yet he gets up here today and he's talking about "how wonderful" and "the British Monarchy and all this" -- as far as we're concerned -- and sure we're an important government, we are one of the governments recognized under the British North America Act.

As far as the hon. Minister of Agriculture when he starts talking about, "we haven't got authority to set an election date, it is going to be unconstitutional," we have every authority in the world. We can name a date, of course it is up to the Premier when he wants to go to the country at the present time, but actually it's up to this Legislature and particularly the Premier and the Executive Council in their wisdom as to when they should go to the country.

So I don't think there is any problem even if the federal authority said they didn't like the date, I think we could forge ahead with any date that this Legislature or the government in power wishes to set. I think this bill has been brought about by the comments that were made prior to the last election. I can remember, and I think the hon.

Member for Calgary North Hill in all honesty said; "there's criticism when you're on this side of the House about the government's taking advantage of the fact they are playing cat and mouse with the election date", and just a year ago now I can remember, "when are you going to call the election", and some of the editorial writers who favour the government on the other side of the House were berating the former government for not naming a date, and we all remember that. But the reason that I'm on my feet today, Mr. Speaker, is more to touch on the fact of when an election can be called.

I don't go along even with this Bill No. 200 as far as the four years is concerned, I can't see why we can't have an election every fifth year, and I've said so publicly. A member is elected for a five year term. I recognize the five year term both in this Legislature and in the Federal Legislature, and so I think that we should look at the five year term if you are going to bring out a bill of this kind rather than the four year term.

You could be just as successful, if the present government carries on, in the constructive way they believe they are carrying on, they have every reason for not calling it for five years. I won't be a bit surprised if the hon. the Prime Minister of Canada decides not to go into an election until next year rather than in this present year. That is right. I do, Mr. Speaker. I say I am not a good forecaster but I am saying what he could do.

If members will recall in the last provincial election in British Columbia, Premier Bennett announced that he would give serious consideration not to call the election for a five year term unless the government was defeated in a money bill or some issue they wanted to go to the country with. But as far as he was concerned, he would carry on up to a five year term. I think, in particular, here in Alberta where we have allowed municipalities to go for the three year term and a set date, I cannot see too much problem really with a set date, Mr. Speaker.

I believe Bill No. 200 has a few weaknesses too, but I do not want to touch on Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1263

23-40 ALBERTA HANSARD April 6th 1972 that until the bill gets before committee. One in particular I would refer to would be the 48 hour notice of motion, but I will leave that to when the bill gets into committee. I would like to place into the record, because I am sure hon. members on both sides of the House, are quite interested in how long they can actually stay in office in Alberta if they wish to under our present legislation. The present Legislative Assembly Act continues unless sooner dissolved, until midnight on September 19, 1976.

For example, five years from the date of the return of the writ of the last election which was September 20, 1971. That does not mean that the government cannot stay in a bit longer than that, and I will touch on this a little later. What I am talking about now is the actual Legislature. The Legislative Assembly Act requires that there be a session of the Legislature at least once every year, so tha