April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 685 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Monday, April 30, 2007 1:00 p.m. Date: 07/04/30 [The Deputy Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Deputy Speaker: Hon. members, please remain standing for the singing of O Canada after the prayer is done. Shall we bow our heads. On this day let each of us pray in our own way for all those who have been killed or injured in the workplace. Life is precious. When it is lost, all of us are impacted.

In a moment of silent contemplation may we now allow our thoughts to remember those taken before their time, those who have suffered through tragedies, and reach out to the families, friends, neighbours, and communities most immediately impacted. Hon. Members: O Canada, our home and native land! True patriot love in all thy sons command. With glowing hearts we see thee rise, The True North strong and free! From far and wide, O Canada, We stand on guard for thee. God keep our land glorious and free! O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

The Deputy Speaker: We’ll continue with the moment of silence. May God provide them eternal peace. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Visitors The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister of International, Intergov- ernmental and Aboriginal Relations. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Indeed, it’s a pleasure for me today to introduce His Excellency Smail Benamara to all members of the Assembly. He is the ambassador of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria.

Just as in Alberta, energy is such an important part of the Algerian economy, with over $75 million per year being exported to Algeria from Alberta. It’s my pleasure to introduce His Excellency. I’d ask our honoured guest to rise and receive the warm welcome from the members of this Assembly. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my great honour to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of this House three very special guests: Mr. and Mrs. Zile Singh, accompa- nied by Neena Amarashi. Mr.

Singh is the deputy consul general of India in Vancouver. He is moving to North Korea as an ambassador for India there. Before coming to Canada, he was the Indian consul general in Herat in Afghanistan. His previous postings were Laos, Nepal, Panama, Finland, Philippines. Neena Amarashi is owner of the IT firm Acrodex. She’s from Vancouver. I would like to thank them for coming to the Legislature. They have already risen. I’d ask everybody to give them the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. Thank you. head: Introduction of Guests The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr.

Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly several people who are closely associated with Alberta’s organ and tissue donation program. They’re seated in the members’ gallery to remind us all of the importance of talking to our loved ones about organ and tissue donation and the positive difference that it can make. I would ask our guests to stand when I announce them. First, we have Erik Williams.

Erik is the program educator for Capital health’s Comprehensive Tissue Centre; Tracey Clare, a donor co- ordinator with Capital health’s human organ procurement and exchange, or HOPE, program. We’re also honoured to have with us Stephanie Ostrander. Stephanie is the wife of an organ and tissue donor. Her husband, Greg, tragically passed away in December 2003. Through many conversations with her spouse Stephanie knew that Greg wished to give the gift of life. We also have with us Beth Tchir. Beth is the mother of a cornea recipient and an active public advocate for organ and tissue donation.

She has seen first-hand the difference that a donation can make to the life of a loved one. All of our guests are standing. I’d like to thank them publicly and ask the House to give them a traditional warm welcome. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Mr. R. Miller: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is indeed my pleasure this afternoon to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly 33 of the very brightest young minds in the entire province.

Of course, they reside and attend school in the wonderful constituency of Edmonton-Rutherford, and they are from Duggan school. I’d like them to please rise along with their teachers that are accompanying them today, Mrs. Nancy Adamson Cavanaugh, Ms Bonnie Eliuk, and Mrs. Carlene Wong, and parent volunteer Mr. Greg Randall. They are in the public gallery. If they could please rise now and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister of Finance. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It is indeed an honour and privilege to introduce to you and through you to Members of the Legislative Assembly Ms Jennifer Harris. Jennifer is actually back in Calgary, which is her home turf, after studying for a PhD in speech pathology in Cambridge, England. I would ask Jennifer to rise and receive the warm welcome of the Legislative Assembly. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly 61 wonderful students from Mary Hanley school in Edmonton-Mill Woods, who are accompanied by teachers Mr. Steve Bain, Ms Philomena Bruch, and Mrs. Lorraine Williamson and parent helpers Mrs. Cheryl Schneider and Mrs. Susan Stein. I’d like to ask the students and staff to rise and please accept the warm traditional welcome from the Assembly. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar.

Alberta Hansard April 30, 2007686 Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to rise and introduce to you and through you to all hon. members of this Assembly guests from the constituency of Edmonton-Gold Bar. We have in the public gallery today seven residents from the Ottewell lodge, which is operated by the Greater Edmonton Foundation. They are accompanied by one staff member and also an individual who is gracious enough to volunteer some of her spare time at the lodge. I would now ask them to please rise. They’re in the public gallery.

They enjoy politics, and this is their first visit to the Legislative Assembly to observe our proceedings. Welcome. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have three introductions today. I’m delighted to introduce to you and through you to this Assembly Brent Southwell. Brent lives in my constitu- ency of Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood and has been a member of the plumbers’ and pipefitters’ local 488 for the past 25 years. Brent was seriously injured on the job and has been unable to work since.

Despite his injuries Brent continues to play a role in the upcoming May Week and the Arts on the Avenue workers’ art show. Prior to his injury he was a volunteer with the Folk Fest for 10 years and has worked on fundraisers for WIN House, the fund for underprivileged children, and the Youth Emergency Shelter. I would ask that he now rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The next person I would like to introduce is Mr. Gil McGowan, and he is the president of the Alberta Federation of Labour.

Previous to this he worked as communication staff for the Alberta Federation of Labour and played a key role in the Friends of Medicare campaigns on behalf of public health care in this province. He has been the president of the Alberta Federation of Labour for nearly two years. He’s been outstanding in his role as a spokesper- son for Alberta labour. He’s been on the picket lines and working behind the scenes to settle labour disputes at Telus, the CBC, Finning, the Brooks strike, and the Palace Casino strike, which is ongoing. He provides dynamic, new leadership for Alberta labour.

He’s taken a strong initiative with respect to the safety of workers in this province. I would ask all members to please give him a warm traditional welcome. 1:10 My last introduction, Mr. Speaker, is Angeline Moellmann. Angeline Moellmann is the wife of the late Grant Moellmann, who was a member of local 720 of the ironworkers here in Edmonton. He was killed near the end of his 42-year career in a fall from a bridge that now bears his name. The city of Edmonton has com- memorated his life by dedicating the bridge by the coliseum that goes over the LRT and the railways as Grant Moellmann Bridge.

His wife, Angeline, has been a strong advocate for workers’ safety since her husband’s passing. She is always willing to speak out on issues around occupational health and safety. I would ask that she please rise and receive the warm traditional welcome of this Assembly. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly Mr. Nicholas Ameyaw. He’s the co-ordinator consultant for the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission.

He has been working in this role for over 20 years and has done a fantastic job by having sessions across the province to educate people and companies about human rights. I would like to ask Nicholas to stand and receive a warm welcome. Thank you. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m very pleased to introduce to you and through you to the members of the Assembly Hazel MacLeod and Marion Eggen. Marion Eggen, I’m pr oud to say, is my mother, and Hazel is my aunt. Both Hazel and Marion are farm girls, originally from the Vermilion area.

Hazel is now retired from her long career as a teacher in Alberta, and she is a proud grandmother with five grandchildren. I think they’re seated in the members’ gallery, and I would ask them now to rise, please, and receive this warm traditional welcome. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton- Meadowlark. Mr. Tougas: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly a delegation from the Professional Association of Residents of Alberta. They are Dr. Kathryn Andrusky, Dr. Trevor Chan, Dr. Milli Gupta, Dr. Kerri Johannson, Dr. Eldon Loh, Dr.

Paul Belletrutti, Dr. Jen Williams, Dr. Lanette Prediger, Dr. Jessica Minion, Dr. Mike Kalisiak, Dr. Aisha Mirza, Dr. Hughie Fraser , Dr. Ivan Kropyvnytskyy, Dr. Martina Puchyr, and Sarah Thomas. I ask that they please rise to accept the traditional warm greeting of this Assembly. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly- Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to introduce to you and to members of the Assembly Darlene Werkman and Francine Willard.

Darlene and Francine along with the Palace Casino strikers have been on the picket line for 234 days, thanks in part to this government’s failure to put in place labour laws that are fair to working Albertans. Darlene has been a dealer at the Palace Casino for nearly 16 years and is a proud union member. Francine is a slot attendant and has been working at the Palace Casino for five and a half years. Francine originally hails from Montreal but has lived in Alberta for many years. They are joined today by UFCW local 401 representative Don Crisall.

I would now ask that they rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathcona. Mr. Lougheed: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased today to introduce to you and through you to the members assembled Dr. Gary McPherson, who will soon r eceive the Alberta Order of Excellence. Gary is accompanied today by Hazav Man, who is here from Israel on a 39-month working permit. I would ask that the members assembled recognize them. The Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, do you have another guest? Mr. MacDonald: No. I’ve already made my introduction.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Deputy Speaker: Are there others?

April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 687 Mr. Shariff: Mr. Speaker, I had intended to introduce a couple of visitors. Unfortunately, they haven’t arrived yet. However, I’ll take advantage of the opportunity and inform the members of this Assembly that 63 years ago the hon. Member for Olds-Didsbury- Three Hills came into this world and is celebrating his birthday, and today he’s seated as the Speaker. Hon. members, please recognize the birthday. The Deputy Speaker: I’ll have to check the Standing Orders to see if mentioning the age of a member is permissible. head: Ministerial Statements The Deputy Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Employment, Immigra- tion and Industry. International Day of Mourning for Workers Killed and Injured on the Job Ms Evans: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Saturday, April 28, was National Day of Mourning for workers killed on the job. Last year 124 people in Alberta died from job-related injuries or illnesses. The previous year there were 143 who died. While there were significantly fewer deaths than in the previous year, 124 deaths are still too many. One death would be too many. There are no excuses.

Everyone – government, employers, and employees – must do a better job to ensure that Albertans can get to work in full confidence that they will return home safe at day’s end. We must educate ourselves and make all Albertans more aware of creating a culture of wellness and safety. We need to help Albertans understand the importance of being our brother’s keeper. We must look out for the safety of our fellow workers, providing cautions where appropriate.

Finally, we should all accept responsibility to lead societal change and move to a more knowledgeable Alberta attitude about the need for a safer workplace in memory of all those we honour and whom, so sadly, we lost. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for the opportu- nity to pay tribute to all the workers who lost their lives while pursuing a better life for themselves, their families, and all Alber- tans.

Every day tens of thousands of men and women across the province go to work simply hoping to put food on the table and to contribute to the comfort and prosperity of their families and their fellow citizens. A simple wish, one shared by the vast majority of Albertans. Yet every year too many workdays end tragically in preventable workplace accidents. Not long ago four temporary foreign workers were injured and two were killed on the job in a terrible roof collapse at the oil sands project near Fort MacKay.

This dreadful accident has deprived the world of two precious human beings and left behind grieving families, friends, and co-workers. Compounding this tragedy is the fact that these were not the first nor the last workplace fatalities in Alberta. The price of progress in this province is far too often paid by workers who are often forced by circumstance to work in unsafe environments under unsustainable pressure to do the job faster and more cheaply. With Alberta’s economy growing so rapidly, we need to rededicate ourselves to workplace safety.

A single life lost is too high a price to pay for a few extra dollars in the public or private purse. We also must not forget the most vulnerable working population, especially our young people. Parents are concerned when their sons and daughters go north to work in the oil sands sector. Mr. Speaker, one of my sons joined a crew north of Fort McMurray a few months ago, and with only two days of general safety training and no specific safety training for the job he was to do, I was more than a little concerned. I asked him if his job was dangerous.

He laughed and said: Dad, the most dangerous thing I do is drive on highway 63. But that did not make me feel better because included among the 124 deaths in the workplace last year were 33 who were killed on our highways. Many ceremonies took place last Saturday, April 28, the day of mourning. We remembered workers who died because of accidents in the workplace, also through vehicle accidents, and also those who died because of work-related diseases.

The stories told by the children and the spouses of those workers left us who were there listening in tears. 1:20 This day of mourning is a time for all of us to remember and to give thanks for the talent, dedication, and simple hard work of Alberta’s workers. It is also time for us to pledge our commitment to workplace safety and better working c onditions for all workers, including vulnerable workers such as young people, single mothers, recent immigrants, persons with disabilities, and our aboriginal population.

We need to pledge better support for injured workers and their families and the families of workers who have died on the job. Their sacrifices have made Alberta what it is today. We must honour those sacrifices by taking action ourselves, action that will reduce workplace injuries and protect the working families of Alberta. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Deputy Speaker: Hon. members, unanimous consent is required for the third party to participate. [Unanimous consent granted] The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Last year 124 workers and 20 farm workers were killed at work or as a result of their work. On April 28 Albertans took time to remember these workers and to express solidarity with the families, friends, and communities left mourning. Members of this Assembly will perhaps be acutely aware of this problem because of the recent deaths of Genbao Ge and Hongliang Liu and the injury of four of their fellow workers. Twenty-seven other workers have been killed in the workplace in the first two months of this year alone.

The labour movement and the New Democrats have stood shoulder to shoulder in fighting for policies that protect workers. Despite the carnage year after year the Alberta government has not taken meaningful action. The false dogma of voluntary compliance combined with a serious lack of inspections have contributed to the intolerable levels of injury and death on Alberta work sites. Until the provincial government adopts a zero-tolerance policy for unsafe work sites, these injuries and deaths will continue. The cost in lives and the devastating impact this has on families of killed workers is already far too high.

Mr. Speaker, this government’s responsibility goes far beyond saying a few good words once a year. Safe workpl aces in Alberta can be a reality. All that is needed is the political will to act. The Deputy Speaker: Hon. members, the hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner and the hon. Member for Edmonton-

Alberta Hansard April 30, 2007688 Manning have also expressed their desire to participate, which requires unanimous consent. [Unanimous consent denied] head: Members’ Statements The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for West Yellowhead. Supportive Living Project in Jasper Mr. Strang: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is with great pleasure that I rise today to congratulate the municipality of Jasper on the sod-turning event we did on April 16, 2007. This event commemorated the development of new, affordable supportive living units comprised of 16 designated assisted living and 21 lodge units.

This was all made possible by a great partnership between three levels of government: Alberta Seniors and Community Supports with a grant of $1,766,500, the Aspen regional health authority, Evergreen Foundation, plus the Yellowhead county, the towns of Edson, Hinton, and Grande Cache, and the municipality of Jasper. Another partnership of this project will be with the Seton hospital. Being connected to the Seton hospital, food and laundry services will be shared, and seniors will be able to age in place.

This is a project that the municipality of Jasper has specifically identified as being important to the needs of their citizens. We know that people who move into this new project will have their health and accommodation needs met, and here’s the most important part: while being in their community. We all know how important it is for our neighbours to remain close to family and friends, their support network. It is important for their quality of life, and it is important for our community. That’s what makes this announce- ment so special. Thanks to all involved. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Dr.

Gary McPherson Mr. Lougheed: Mr. Speaker, it’s a pleasure to rise and recognize Gary McPherson, one of the latest inductees to the Alberta Order of Excellence. Gary is no stranger to members of this Assembly and is a highly distinguished Albertan. He’s being inducted for advanc- ing the status of persons with disabilities and building caring communities. There’s no question that Gary has been instrumental in improving the lives of persons with disabilities in Alberta. He served as chair of the Premier’s Council on the Status of Persons with Disabilities for 10 years.

Since 1998 he has served as the executive director of the Canadian Centre for Social Entrepreneurship in the faculty of business at the University of Alberta. In Gary’s words, the centre works to combine the heart of business with the heart of the community through the creativity of the individual. This is an excellent summation of Gary’s vision of the potential for our society. Gary is called upon frequently as a speaker at conferences and public events. His life experiences allow him to speak authoritatively on issues such as health care delivery, home care, disability and sport, volunteerism, and advocacy.

He has received numerous other awards and recognitions for his work in stronger and inclusive communities. He was inducted into the Edmonton and Alberta Sports Hall of Fame for his contribution to wheelchair basketball. In 1995 the University of Alberta awarded Gary an honorary doctor of laws. Last year Gary participated as a candidate in the Alberta Progres- sive Conservative leadership race, and Gary added to the debate by highlighting quality-of-life issues and undoubtedly added to the process with his quick wit and humour.

Gary is an outstanding Albertan, and his investiture into the Alberta Order of Excellence is well deserved. Mr. Speaker, I would ask all members to join me in congratulating Dr. Gary McPherson. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Red Deer-North. Education Week Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. April 29 to May 5 is Education Week in Alberta. This is a time we traditionally take to acknowledge the contributions of our teachers, our support staff, and our volunteers to Alberta’s world-class learning system.

Through collaboration and partnerships Alberta’s students, whether public, separate, charter, private, home-schooled, or francophone, are benefiting every day from all that our education system has to offer, including a high-quality curriculum. On April 22 a publication titled Students First made its way into many Alberta homes. This publication illustrates the collaboration that exists in our education sy stem and the positive impact it is having on our K to 12 students. This year’s Education Week theme is Innovative, Inspired: Our Future . . . Our Students!

Alberta students benefit from an education system that is progressive and engaging. It embraces new tec hnology as a means to deliver Alberta’s world-class curriculum. All across this province students and teachers are involved in Education Week activities. I would like to direct members of this House to the Alberta Education website, www.education.gov.ab.ca, where they can read for themselves the many school activities occurring in their constituencies this week. Mr.

Speaker, I encourage all Albertans to celebrate Education Week from April 29 to May 5 and to recognize the teachers, support staff, volunteers, and stakeholders who are making a tremendous difference in the lives of our students. Thank you. The Clerk: Oral Question Period. Mr. R. Miller: Mr. Speaker, we have a member’s statement on this side. The Deputy Speaker: It’s 1:30. We’ll get to that after question period. Mr. R. Miller: Thank you. head: Oral Question Period The Deputy Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I work with him as much as I can. Emergency Health Services Dr. Taft: Vince Motta’s tragic death in 2002 was the subject of a fatality inquiry that resulted in 25 recommendations by Judge Manfred Delong on how to improve emergency services and prevent premature deaths. But four years later, after this government has ignored numerous warnings and missed many opportunities for improvements, 18-year-old Jordan Johanson died after waiting 12 hours for surgery on a ruptured appendix. My questions are to the

April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 689 minister of health. In 2003 Judge Delong warned that the health system is in crisis and requires dramatic change, not incremental change, but four years later Calgarians are experiencing a record number of code burgundies and code reds as well as staff and bed shortages. Can the minister explain why so many problems continue to plague Calgary’s health system? 1:30 The Deputy Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think we need to focus on the fact that there’s incredible growth happening.

Since the Motta inquiry I can say that $1.4 billion has been put into expanding capacity in Calgary, and that expansion is happening. There was a thorough review of the findings of the Delong inquiry, and many of the things that were suggested have been undertaken. With respect to the latest incident it’s a tragic incident, and the Calgary health authority is looking very closely at what happened and what can be done to prevent that type of thing happening. But it’s not fair to say that nothing has happened or that there hasn’t been progress.

There has been considerable progress in Calgary, and there will be considerably more progress in Calgary. Dr. Taft: Well, that progress isn’t showing up in the emergency rooms and in the hospital wards. Since 2000 the average wait time in emergency to see a doctor has increased by 45 minutes, and the number of patients who leave the emergency room without seeing a doctor is up by about 10 per cent. Given that so little progress has been made to improve health services in Calgary – and by many measures it has been getting worse, in fact, Mr.

Speaker – how does this minister explain this government’s failure to act on all of Judge Delong’s recommendations? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, much action has been taken. Again, the capacity is being increased. There is expansion happen- ing at virtually every health facility in Calgary. A tower is being built beside the Foothills and a new floor on the Rockyview, so it has expanded capacity. Indeed, the Health Link, where people can phone in and get advice instead of going to emergency, has done a lot to reduce the strain on emergency, but it continues to grow. More work is yet to be done. Dr. Taft: Mr.

Speaker, the public isn’t buying that line. Judge Delong cautioned that unless the Calgary health region makes dramatic improvements, an independent commission should be appointed to conduct a public inquiry – a full public inquiry – into the financing and delivery of emergency health services. To the minister: is it this minister’s position that Calgary’s health system truly has dramatically improved over the last four years, and if not, why has this government failed to initiate that inquiry? Mr. Hancock: Mr.

Speaker, all that hon. member and any other member on that side who doesn’t understand this needs to do is to take a look at the dramatic increase in services that have been provided to Albertans not just in Calgary but right across the province: dramatic increase in heart surgeries and dramatic increase in MRIs and dramatic increase in services right through the piece. Now, sure, there are still issues to be addressed, and we continue to address them. Capacity issues are being addressed. But to suggest that there has been no progress is patently false.

The Deputy Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Teachers’ Unfunded Pension Liability Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last fall in addressing concerns of teachers the person who is now the current Premier claimed to have “always bargained in good faith,” and he said that he wouldn’t “prejudice negotiations” on the teachers’ pension unfunded liability “before we’ve even sat down at the table.” Yet this Education minister’s fumbling attempt to address the unfunded pension liability undercuts the collective bargaining process and deliberately prejudices negotiations. Teachers across this province are feeling used and abused by this government.

To the Minister of Education: why has this minister betrayed the words and promises of his own Premier? Mr. Liepert: Mr. Speaker, in the budget announcement of last Thursday the government, on behalf of taxpayers of Alberta, initiated an offer of $25 million that will go to new teachers in Alberta. An Hon. Member: How much? Mr. Liepert: Twenty-five million dollars. If the hon. member has a problem with that, then say so. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Educa- tion’s recent letter to the Alberta T eachers’ Association regarding pensions – the one he mentions there – proves that this government’s word actually cannot be trusted. Time and again the Premier promised the teachers’ pension issue would not be linked to labour negotiations. For example, I quote the Premier from just four months ago. “I would never use such an emotional matter as a bargaining chip in the heat of a labour dispute.” To the Minister of Education: did the Premier give this minister permission to break the Premier’s promises to teachers? Mr. Liepert: Mr.

Speaker, there is no heat of labour negotiations. This is a good-faith offer. It starts September 1, 2007, and goes until August 31, 2008. If the hon. member is taking the position of the Alberta Teachers’ Association and not of y oung t eachers in this province, then say so. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, what’s easy to say on the campaign trail is proving difficult for this Premier to deliver.

The Premier promised a fair and lasting resolution to the unfunded liability in the teachers’ pension plan, a problem that will cost tens of billions of dollars if it isn’t addressed now. The Premier promised to separate the pension issue from salary negotiations. He promised to listen to teachers. He has broken all those promises. This government is playing politics with education over the pension issue. The Premier said that he wouldn’t, but he is. To the Minister of Education: will this minister do the right thing, withdraw his misguided offer, and sit down in good faith with the teachers? Mr.

Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, as part of that announcement we also said that we would be creating a small task force that was going to meet with interested stakeholders to find a long-term resolution to this issue. So, again, I challenge the hon. member: if he wants to deny new teachers and young teachers in this province $25 million in benefits, then say so.

Alberta Hansard April 30, 2007690 The Deputy Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Temporary Rent Regulation Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last week the government finally released the report from the all-party Affordable Housing Task Force along with their response to it. Having rejected 38 of the task force’s 50 recommendations, the Conservatives are clearly saying: everything is just fine here. Well, everything’s not just fine.

Among the 38 recommendations they rejected was the one calling for temporary rent regulation to protect Alberta’s tenants from rent gouging. To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, who can’t honestly believe that the market will prevent rent gouging – the state of the market is precisely what enables it – why did he and the Premier reject temporary rent regulations today? Do you want people to lose their homes? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, first of all, I need to say that in the province of Alberta in 1975 we did have rent controls. This government has learned from history that rent controls do not work.

When rent controls were in place, what it did do was suffocate the addition of rental units in the province. We’ve also looked at different provinces in Canada, and different provinces in Canada have the same feeling that we do: rent controls do not work to adjust or to try to deal with the problems of having more rental units on the market. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Not having rent controls doesn’t get anything built in this province either. The government did accept the recommendation to limit rent increases to one a year, which is a good idea.

But because they did it last Tuesday without also instituting temporary rent regulation, many renters woke up on Wednesday or Thursday or came home from work on Friday to find notices of massive rent hikes. Now, if the government had dotted the i’s and crossed the t’s – and they sat on the task force report long enough that, Lord knows, they had time – you know, this wouldn’t have happened. But, no, they just blurt it out in a news conference, don’t announce any retroactivity or even an immediate effective start date, bad landlords exploit the loophole, and now they’re backpedaling like crazy.

To the President of the Treasury Board and Minister for Service Alberta: did he not realize that this would happen? Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, what we did learn on this side is that you learn from the past; you don’t live in the past. You have to move forward. There is nothing that you can do in a market that will stabilize rents better than build new housing units. The answer is the balance between renter and landlord. Our legislation that will be introduced will be retroactive to April 24. I’m sure the hon. member would like it to go back to 1952. 1:40 Mr. Taylor: Actually, no, Mr. Speaker.

I wasn’t alive back then. Maybe the member opposite was. Mr. Speaker, I expect that what will come from the backpedaling is that the Conservatives will try to make the one rent hike per year retroactive and then pretend that they never messed this up. But you wonder whether this is just another example of a rural cabinet that doesn’t understand and doesn’t really care about what city folk go through. To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing: will this government admit that their ideology has failed the people of Alberta again and institute temporary rent regulations?

Everybody, even renters from the city, needs a home. Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, I do want to say that when we look at the challenges of growth pressures in Alberta, those challenges are in large centres, those challenges are in Fort McMurray, and they are also in smaller centres throughout Alberta. So when we looked at the Affordable Housing Task Force recommendations, we looked at them in the holistic sense of Alberta trying to address the growth pressures of all of Alberta. The Deputy Speaker: First third party main question. The leader of the NDP. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

This government promised openness and transparency, then turned around and created a bad housing policy behind closed doors. The rent policy of this government has a loophole so big you could drive a Mack truck right through it. Limiting rent increases to one per year with no limit on the size of that rent increase is an invitation to the gouging of renters in this province. My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Since the minister has rejected the recommendations of his own task force for rent guidelines but will allow one increase per year, will he tell renters how big an increase in rent the govern- ment is prepared to allow a landlord to levy? Is it $250 a month? $500? $1,000? $2,000? Is there a limit, Mr. Minister? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. First of all, the recommendation to limit the rent increases to one year is to add some stability to renters to give them some predictability on how often rents could be increased.

I need to add, also, that this legisla- tion that is being brought forward will, as the Minister of Service Alberta said, be brought back to the 24th of April, when the announcement was made. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Well, thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. But that won’t help renters. We’ve seen exactly how the landlords are going to respond to this little bit of bad policy by the particular rent increase for the poor woman, a senior, who got a $400 rent hike.

Now, her landlord, unfortunately, gave her a $20 rent increase already this year, so he can’t do this once you’re done with your legislation. But those landlords that haven’t given a rent increase this year can give an increase of $400 or $500 or $600 or $1,000, and there’s nothing you’re going to do to stop it. Why not? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned previously, rent controls do not work. We have had and seen the history.

The hon. member from the third party knows that it doesn’t work and also that we need to look to the future to make sure that the workers and the individu- als that are being brought into our workforce have some place to live and have some place to rent. We do not need to curtail that growth. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, you know, the minister is fairly new, so I’ll give him a bit of break, but I’m going to fill him in a little bit. In the province of Ontario, where they’ve had rent guidelines for 15 years, the construction of new

April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 691 rental units exceeds Alberta’s dramatically. In fact, it’s risen dramatically while the construction of new rental units in Alberta, where there are no guidelines, has dropped dramatically. So will the minister go back and confirm my statement and come back in the House tomorrow and take back his statement that rent guidelines don’t work and implement them immediately? Mr. Danyluk: Well, first of all, Mr. Speaker, it’s indeed a compli- ment when the hon. member from the third party suggests that I’m new.

But I need to say in regard to the availability: there are more units available in Alberta every day. They may take different forms of rental units, supported units, condos, but we are dealing with the issue of having affordable housing in Alberta. The Deputy Speaker: The first question for the hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner. Municipal Sustainability Initiative Funding Mr. Hinman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Some problems do take a little while to fix, but some can be done immediately. These are, unfortunately, follow-up questions to two weeks ago, when we needed some urgent action, and none has been taken.

The municipal sustainability initiative funding is not working. It’s a disaster for municipalities. I asked two weeks ago for the town of Taber. They have tenders out for their water treatment plant. This new funding is not going to address it. My question is to the minister of munici- pal affairs. Will he sit down and work out something for the town of Taber so that they can go ahead with their water treatment plant? The MSIF is not going to do it. Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, the municipal sustainability initiative has funding that was supported for municipalities. That funding is $400 million. An Hon.

Member: How much? Mr. Danyluk: Four hundred million dollars that is distributed to municipalities on a pro-rated basis of the amount of funding that their ratepayers supported to the education tax. So this funding is going back. Will it solve all problems and all big projects? Prob- ably not. Will it help? Yes, it will. Mr. Hinman: Well, Mr. Speaker, it doesn’t address their problems, and it’s not even long term. They don’t know whether it’s one year, five years, 10 years, and there’s nothing sustainable or for sure to plan on. It’s not acceptable. The next problem again goes to the town of Coutts.

They had a wall put up in their town two years ago. It only took 28 years for Germany to take down their wall, but this government has failed to address it. They need to take the wall down or put the gate back in to access that town. It’s economic disaster for them. They haven’t reacted. The hon. Premier said that he would respond and get back to us immediately. It’s been two weeks and nothing. So my question would be to the Minister of Infrastructure and Transporta- tion. When is this government going to address the problem in Coutts and open up a gate or take down the wall? Mr. Ouellette: Mr.

Speaker, the minister of municipal affairs wants to respond to this one. Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to say: you know what happens? There’s too much mayon- naise, the bologna’s too thick, the bread is too dry, and of course the milk is too warm. But the municipal sustainability initiative has a 10-year window in it, and that wi ndow will be for the addition of $1.4 billion to municipalities. That’s $1.4 billion. Mr. Hinman: Well, that didn’t answer Coutts’ problem, and I doubt that the government is going to do anything.

What the cities are going to get from year to year is for one year, and it’s arbitrary. It’s not acceptable. The third one to the Minister of Environment. The Snake River ranch is being cut off. B.C. is going forward, and they are address- ing flood control and putting in rip-rap to control the banks before flooding out. This government needs to act. They’ve failed to act. Are they going to prevent the washout of the bridge and the road, or are they going to let it go by and then spend millions to try and repair it? Will they act for the Snake River ranch? Mr. Renner: Mr.

Speaker, I’m not familiar with this specific instance. It hasn’t been brought to my attention. I’ll be more than happy to look into it and provide the member with an appropriate answer. The Deputy Speaker: First main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Safety of Temporary Foreign Workers Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A fatal accident that occurred at the Canadian Natural Resources Limited’s Horizon oil sands project last week has raised serious questions about the safety of temporary foreign workers in this province.

Currently it is not required that employers inform foreign temporary workers about their legal rights, and restrictive visas that tie workers to a single employer make it very difficult for them to speak out or to refuse unsafe work. My question is for the Minister of Employment, Immigration and Industry. Will the minister implement policies to ensure the safety of all workers, or will this incident be just one of many international embarrassments? 1:50 Ms Evans: Mr. Speaker, may I first say that any time we have an injury or a death on a work site is a sad and tragic day.

I feel huge sorrow for the families and have se nt a letter expressing to the Chinese government my sincere regrets about the deaths of both workers and the injury of the others. I think it’s unfortunate to make an automatic link relative to their placement on this job site in Alberta. We administer the law, the Employment Standards Code, in Alberta the same way no matter what Albertan, no matter what worker is working on a site. There is an investigation that’s taking place. We had four investigators and a manager originally, and they are completely investigating the incident.

The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Internal documents from CNRL provide detailed safety requirements for the construction of tanks on-site and actually raise concerns that wind in the region could pose an additional risk to worker safety. Albertans need to know if safety requirements were followed. Can the minister tell us when the last on-site inspection of the Horizon project occurred and whether or not basic safety standards were met? Ms Evans: Well, Mr. Speaker, that is the very reason we’re doing an investigation. I can neither provide the history of the safety

Alberta Hansard April 30, 2007692 inspections on that site nor on Horizon’s work sites at this time. But at such time as we have a complete investigation, gathering all the facts, then we will release it. There has been misinformation provided. For example, there was a suggestion that fall protection is not mandatory for workers on this type of setting, and fall protection is one of the safety standards. So rather than give any bit of information, we’ll wait until the investigation is complete and provide it in a very transparent fashion both to the government itself and also to Albertans.

The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The temporary foreign worker program is supposedly in pl ace to address the la bour shortage, yet letters from federal union officials show that qualified Albertan workers were available to work on the Horizon project. Local workers have the necessary safety training, professional credentials, and union representation to ensure that the work is done safely and efficiently, but the company prefers to employ temporary foreign workers, presumably to cut costs. This is just one example of how the program is being abused.

To the same minister: will this government stand up and support Alberta’s existing workforce or continue to promote the temporary foreign worker program, which has a growing record of safety concerns? Ms Evans: Mr. Speaker, in this Assembly I have spoken before on the temporary foreign worker program. It is a federal government program. It is not administered by our government. However, in the labour market opinions that are done before any foreign workers are allowed into the country, there is an analysis that is completed about whether or not there’s an availability of Alberta workers to do the job.

We believe Albertans should be employed first. All that means is that every Albertan should have an opportunity to work. If a company is able to demonstrate that it was not able to get sufficient workers for a particular job site to do a particular task, then they are successful in receiving an opportunity to bring in temporary foreign workers. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Electronic Health Records Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Lots of public money has been spent on the electronic health information system, but my constituents have been frustrated by having to repeat filling in forms and providing the same informa tion for various health service providers. It seems like there is a lack of information sharing, that causes inefficient health care operation. My question today is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. What is the state of our Alberta health information system? The Deputy Speaker: The Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Health and Wellness is currently on target with the health authorities to meet the goal of having every Albertan on an electronic health record by 2008. We currently have 17,000 health professionals from each corner of the province now registered and trained to use Alberta Netcare. Doctors, nurses, and pharmacists using Netcare in their practice say that the technology is making a real difference in terms of the quality of care that they’re able to provide to their patients.

Through Netcare our health care providers have health information at the point of care, when they’re seeing each patient in their office, clinic, or in a hospital. In short, we’re hoping that those frustrations that the hon. member refers to will soon be over. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given the case of my constituent who has been referred by her family doctor to one hospital and a specialist doctor from that hospital referred her to another specialist in another hospital – it resulted in her having to repeat medical tests and being scheduled for surgery at both hospitals. So this has not only caused worry for my constituent but also brings up the question of how our health care’s precious resources were used. My question is to the same minister. When can we see something like the personal health care card so patients will not be subject to this inefficient process? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr.

Speaker, we should be seeing progress even as we speak. The Calgary health region has just brought up a new electronic front end so that tests can be ordered online. The pharmacy information network is up and running, and as I said, we have the goal of having every Albertan on an electronic health record by 2008. That should cover some 75 per cent of lab tests and diagnostics. So it won’t at that stage still have everybody on it, but we’ll have the level of information sharing that should resolve the type of frustration that the hon. member refers to.

More timely patient information leads to better care decisions and better and safer outcomes and a more effective use of the health system, and the purpose of the electronic health record is exactly to reduce that duplication of testing and that extra use of the health care system’s time. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that Alberta’s public spending on the health care system has surpassed $12 billion – that’s 36 per cent of every public dollar spent – a cost-efficient improvement of nearly 1 per cent means that $120 million can be spent on new and better things.

So my question is to the same minister. What are you going to do to drive the process of re- engineering our health care operation to make it economical, effective, and efficient for patients and workers? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The electronic health record will be the backbone of the re-engineering of the service delivery process. Much of it is in place. There’s more work to be done to make sure that the syst ems work together. We’ve got the electronic health record, which, as I said, will be in place by 2008.

We’ve established the physician office system programs, and the new agreement with the AMA will help us further that, so even more physicians’ offices, with the ultimate goal of all of them being on the system. We have the new clinical information systems, health technology in the regional health authorities. So innovation of technology and the electronic health record and, particularly, being able to share diagnostic results, be ing able to share health records among service providers are absolutely critical to re-engineering the system and flattening out the increase in the costs of the health system.

The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton- Meadowlark.

April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 693 Physician Supply Mr. Tougas: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government recently, finally, removed the requirement for medical students to pay interest on their student loans while pursuing their residency program. Now, we’re glad they did so because we’ve been advocating such a move for some time. Of course, all this does is defer these payments, and what huge payments they are. This mountain of debt deters potential students and imposes additional stress on an already challenging profession. My questions are to the Minister of Advanced Education and Technology.

Will the minister commit to lowering the cost of medical education in Alberta so that students and later residents do not face such a daunting mountain of debt? The Deputy Speaker: The Minister of Advanced Education and Technology. Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Obviously, as we are entering a huge crunch in the development of our province, we have to manage these growth pressures of this huge number of people coming into play. So it isn’t one sector of the health workforce that we’re going to concentrate our efforts on.

We have a co-ordinated strategy that is being developed through three ministries to work on the total gamut of the health work force strategy and all health care providers. As it relates to physicians, obviously we have added a number of spaces to the clinical spaces. First-year physician spaces are up to 257 spaces. That’s a double-digit increase. We’re going to continue to do those sorts of things that help make our postsecondary education system affordable to all classes and all categories of our students and in a co-ordinated, co-operative fashion with the postsecondary institutions. 2:00 Mr.

Tougas: Well, Mr. Speaker, with so much at stake we need to ensure that our medical students get the best training possible. We can achieve this goal predominantly by the hiring and retention of the very best medical educators. Without excellent t eaching, our residents and our undergraduate medical students will not be able to reach their full potential. To the same minister: what, if anything, is the government doing to ensure that the best educators from around the world are coming to Alberta and staying here? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That is a very good question. Contrary to, perhaps, the hon. Member for Calgary-Currie, who believes that I’m a rural cabinet minister with a very narrow view, we do have a very international view in our department and in our government. We are looking at bringing in instructors from all over the world. We are looking at ways and means that we might be able to actually grow those instructors here in Canada. We’re looking at ways and means to incent instructors and physicians, I might add, who are going to be required in this training process, to create those spots.

That’s all part of the health workforce strategy that is coming forward and in some cases being implemented in different spots right now through the three ministries in government. Mr. Tougas: Mr. Speaker, there simply aren’t enough doctors in this province to go around. The situation is already serious and destined to get much worse. My final question to the Minister of Health and Wellness. The ministry’s business plan calls for 148 extra postgrad- uate medical seats. Does the minister consider this increase to be sufficient to alleviate this critical shortage? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr.

Speaker, obviously we want to work very closely with the Ministry of Advanced Education and Technology to make sure that there are spaces available for every Albertan who wants to advance their education. But with respect to the seats that we have, there won’t be sufficient seats until we’ve filled the full capacity that we need. That doesn’t just come from expanding places in our universities and making it possible for Albertans to get educated here. It means supporting Albertans who have gone elsewhere to get their education, helping them to come back.

It means helping others who want to come here find their places. So it’s not a simple, single approach to making sure that we get the doctors and other health care professionals we need but a full health workforce strategy, which the Minister of Employment, Immigration and Industry, the Minister of Advanced Education and Technology, and myself are working forward and bringing through the process and which we discussed with stakeholders on April 13 to see whether we are going in the right direction or whether we could take this further. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Leduc-Beaumont- Devon.

Organ and Tissue Donation Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. National Organ and Tissue Donor Awareness Week is held every year in April to recognize the importance of organ donations to improve quality of life for many Canadians. My question is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Can the minister bring the House up to date on the state of organ and tissue transplantation in Alberta today? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you Mr. Speaker. Alberta has a very strong organ transplant program, but there’s a lot more to be done.

Three hundred organ transplants were performed in our province in 2006. The University of Alberta hospital is one of the top transplant facilities in North America and performed 244 organ transplants and more than 1,300 tissue transplants last year. Statistics show that the number of Albertans who are organ donors has increased from 31 per million in 2003 to 41.6 donors per million in 2004, the highest rate in Canada and above the national average of 27.7 million. Regrettably, there are still cases where appropriate matches cannot be found in time to save lives.

In 2006 40 Albertans died while awaiting transplants. There’s more to be done. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first supplemental is to the same minister. While there’s been some good work going on, the wait is still very long for many individuals. Can the minister tell this House what is being done to reduce the number of Albertans waiting to receive organ transplants? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member is correct. The shortage of organs and tissues for transplant is a longstanding national issue.

Over 400 Albertans are on waiting lists to receive an organ transplant, with more waiting for tissue that can restore sight, restore mobility, or improve quality of life. There are factors leading to the need for transplants that we cannot prevent, such as genetics and viruses. However, there are many factors that can be prevented, such as high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes,

Alberta Hansard April 30, 2007694 burns, injury, alcohol and tobacco use, all of which contribute to the need for transplant. Our department is currently working on a number of health promotion activities and initiatives that focus on healthy eating and active living, which will prevent the need for an organ transplant, and we’re working on funding for specialized equipment and expansion of programs so that the need to get tissue from sources outside of Alberta is decreased. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final question is to the same minister.

What can Albertans do to increase their awareness and help reduce waiting lists so that more people who are ill can receive this great gift of life? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There’s something very simple that every Albertan can do. Eighty-one per cent of Canadians have said that they’re willing to donate, but only 65 per cent of them advise their families of their wishes. Albertans need to talk to their families about their wish to donate.

They should also take the time to sign the universal donor card on the back of their Alberta health care card, as I have done and, I know, everyone of you in this Assembly will have considered doing if you haven’t done it already. We need to take personal responsibility very seriously and do what we can to be healthy and prevent injury. We are going to be distributing these green ribbons that I’m wearing. I’d ask members to wear them this week. We’ve missed organ donor week, but wear them, and have people ask you what you can do, and then tell them: be prepared to donate an organ. The Deputy Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Royalty Revenues Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Energy tabled this document – it’s an extensive review of our royalty structure between 2005 and 2006 – in this House on April 16. After reviewing an uncensored copy of one of the reports within this tabling, it is clear that this government is too embarrassed to share the truth on our royalty rates with Albertans. My first question is to the Minister of Energy.

Why was the chart from the Wood Macken- zie report showing that the Alberta government collects less in royalties than six oil- and gas-producing U.S. states censored from the record of this House? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. First of all, we did table the information so that all Albertans have an opportunity to read the information if they feel like they want to read it. There are pieces of information in any report that may be fundamental bits of information that are required for the government’s purposes that are not allowed out in public.

I’m not embarrassed about any of the information that we have provided. We’ll continue to provide the information they require, and we will continue with the royalty review that’s being conducted under the auspices of the Minister of Finance. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That certainly was a valiant attempt at an answer. Again to the same minister: who in cabinet ordered this proof of the government’s failure to collect a fair share of royalties to be censored from the public record? Documents were censored from the public record. Why? Mr. Knight: Mr.

Speaker, there is nothing in any of those docu- ments that would indicate to anybody that we have not collected a fair share of royalties for Albertans. I must also add that that was a grand attempt at a question. Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr. Speaker, the reason why the minister and this government should be embarrassed is because through

section 24 in this report you censored the fact that the province of Alberta collects significantly less in royalties than six states in the lower 48 oil- and gas-producing states. You should be ashamed of yourself. Why did you do that? Why did you censor this document? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Thank you. Mr. Speaker, the situation is this, and I’ve explained this to the gentleman opposite on other occasions, particularly just last week. You can take a snapshot of a royalty from any place in the world and compare apples to oranges.

The royalty structure in the province of Alberta has served Albertans very well for many, many years, and it will continue to do so. Under this government we are building a stronger Alberta, and the royalty review will prove that. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Climate Change Mr. Eggen: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. If the federal plan to reduce climate change emissions can be best characterized as a total fraud, then our much more modest Alberta plan is at least a total fraud times three.

Under this government’s mismanagement we will suffer climate change emissions at least 44 per cent above 1990 levels in the next three years, yet it would take a premium of just a dollar per barrel and perhaps a little backbone to achieve absolute reductions. We are living on borrowed time, and I for one refuse to visit the dreadful consequences of inaction upon our children. When will the Minister of Environment do the right thing and put in place mean- ingful absolute reductions to carbon emissions? Mr. Renner: You know, Mr.

Speaker, I often wonder why it is that those who have all of the answers to complex questions never have to be accountable for actually implementing them. The plan that we have in place is a plan that makes sense. It’s a plan that will create the environment so that in the medium to longer term we will in fact have absolute reductions. We don’t make projections that we don’t know we can keep. We make regulations and policy that we know we can implement. 2:10 Mr. Eggen: Mr. Speaker, it’s perfectly reasonable to make absolute reductions if you have the political will to do so. I refuse to have you saying that.

Part of the new federal clean air plan is to impose absolute reductions on noxious air pollutants such as particulates, nitrous oxide, and sulphur dioxide. Again, this government has let the pollution standards in this pr ovince slide to the point where we’re facing a crisis with respiratory problems and a burden on our health care system. Are we going to sit back, then, and wait for the federal government to salvage air quality in Alberta, or are we going to let the government get ahead of the game for once and put in place provincial measures to realize absolute reductions in toxic air pollution?

April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 695 Mr. Renner: Well, once again, Mr. Speaker, we have a situation where someone is taking something totally out of context and not understanding what he’s talking about. The fact of the matter is that in this province we have been regulating the issue regarding pollutants, NOx, and SOx well in advance of anything that the federal government ever contemplated. This legislation, quite frankly, makes more sense to Ontario than it does to Alberta. Alberta’s been there, and we’ll be ahead of the pack for a long time to come. Mr. Eggen: Mr.

Speaker, that’s just absolutely, patently not true. The federal air quality plan would allow the trading of pollution credits across this country. This is un acceptable and illogical. Particulate matter, sulphur dioxide, and smog must be dealt with where people are forced to breathe polluted air, like here. Will the Environment minister fight to en sure that we will not allow the trading of dirty air credits so Alberta industry can continue to pollute and affect the health of Albertans while we pay for the clean air in Ontario or Quebec? Are you going to allow the trading, or are we going to deal with it here?

Mr. Renner: Well, I think I answered his third question with my second answer, because I indicated to him that we are ahead of the game. We have already been dealing with NOx and SOx. We talked about how we’re going to continue to deal with them, and I’ve also been quite public in the discussions that I’ve had regarding the need for us to develop a policy around cumulative impact. Mr. Speaker, that policy around cumulative impact is exactly the issue that this member is referring to.

The Deputy Speaker: It’s nice to see so much energy that has evolved since the week in the constituency, but perhaps we could tone it down a bit before I recognize the hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Regional Municipal Planning and Development Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Sturgeon county is expecting sudden industrial growth within the county partly because of an onset of upgraders and refineries, and recent reports indicate that the county itself will require some $600 million of infrastructure just to support that growth.

To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing: is it expected that the entire capital region now come up with that $600 million to service that growth, which must be serviced because, otherwise, it’ll detract from investment and diminish quality of life, or will this bill be footed by the province? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I just want to say that the emphasis really needs to be on planning. We need to have the municipalities working together in regard to planning.

We as municipalities need to communicate and collaborate and co- operate together in what’s best for the region. In the municipal sustainability fund, what does take pl ace is that it promotes and provides municipalities with the initiative to work together towards a common goal so we don’t have the duplication, so we don’t have planning going into silos or individual stovepipes. So I want to say that as far as the support for the funding that is n ecessary, we need to look at it on a regional basis. Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, I’m glad to hear that the minister is a supporter of planning.

In that case, can we expect some mechanism to be in place to support the growth and the management of growth in the region? Mr. Danyluk: Well, I will say that the growth pressures of Alberta are a major challenge for all municipalities. That is why this government is and has looked at the 10-year sustainability plan that adds some predictability to municipalities so that they know the support that municipalities will get from this government, and right now, Mr. Speaker, it has been said many times: ramped up to $1.4 billion per year for 10 years. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. In that case, can the minister assure Edmontonians and the entire capital region that a decade from now we will not be feeling some of the growing pains that are now felt in Wood Buffalo? Mr. Danyluk: Well, I think, Mr. Speaker, the key, as was mentioned before, is to have planning so that municipalities can work together and look towards the future to see how they can plan together for the growth pressures and the growth that’s going to take place, not only in one municipality but all municipalities on how they can work together to address those growth pressures. The Deputy Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Major Community Facilities Program Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government is more concerned about photo ops than being accountable with taxpayers’ money. Although this government hasn’t even figured out how to run its current grant programs, that hasn’t stopped it from launching another one, the major community facilities program.

To the Minister of Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture: given that the guidelines for this new program are not yet complete, will this minister inform this House if top Tories will have easier access to the money than hard-working Albertans? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Goudreau: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Cer- tainly, like all of our other programs that are on the Internet and people are aware as to where the money goes, this new program will be the same. We will try to be as equitable as possible to all regions.

Certainly, there are dollars that have been identified for the various cities. There are dollars that have been identified for rural Alberta. We’re going to try to spread those dollars around right across the province to meet the growing pressures that have been identified across the province. Mr. Agnihotri: To the same minister: why did this government in an election year give its grant department a 66 per cent increase in funding and its Environment department only a 6 per cent increase in funding? Why? Mr. Goudreau: Mr.

Speaker, the members opposite would be the first ones to ask us to respond to increasing pressures. Initially they were asking to spend additional monies in health. They’re asking for additional money in education. Now, you know, certainly, they’re concerned about the additional monies that we are putting to meet the recreational facilities, the sports facilities, the arts facilities that are desperately needed in the province of Alberta. We’re

Alberta Hansard April 30, 2007696 responding to those increased pressures to meet those particular needs. Mr. Agnihotri: To the same minister: why is this minister taking so long to table the names of the 43 grant recipients that broke CIP rules? If they have the proof, if they have the information, why don’t you table right now? Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, I am really pleased that the member opposite is environmentally concerned. He’s recycling some of the questions that we had a few weeks ago.

I indicated that we’ve got many thousands of applications to go through to be able to pull out those 40 applications that he’s alluding to. We are reviewing those, and we are making sure that no mistakes have been made. As I indicated in the past, we don’t believe that any mistakes have been made, but we are looking at them. Thank you. The Deputy Speaker: Hon. members, we did 78 questions and answers today, a little short. I attribute that to the excessive enthusiasm that we showed today. head: 2:20 Members’ Statements (continued) Organ and Tissue Donation Mrs. Fritz: Mr.

Speaker, as we heard earlier in question period through our hon. Minister of Health and Wellness, we are paying special tribute this week to national organ donor and tissue donation. I’d like to take this opportunity to further address this very important issue as it touches many of us, our families, our friends, and our loved ones here in Alberta. Mr. Speaker, we do have some of the best transplant technology in the world. We have some of the most highly skilled surgeons and some of the most prestigious transplant hospitals, yet there are never enough organs.

Did you know that approximately 15 out of every million Canadians are organ donors, putting us as a country in the bottom half of all the countries in the western world where trans- plants are performed? Giving the gift of life is a phrase often heard when speaking about organ donation, but the full consequences of what that really means may not be heard. Organ donation is a sensitive subject for family members to discuss, Mr. Speaker. We are reluctant to acknowledge that sudden, tragic deaths occur and could possibly touch our families.

If a sudden tragedy does happen, grief can be overwhelm- ing, and the opportunity to discuss organ donation has passed. Many donor families have shared that the act of donation helps to ease their grief. Nothing can replace the loss of a loved one, Mr. Speaker, but donation often allows family members to feel that something positive has resulted from their tragedy. Organ donation is the ultimate example of sharing one’s gifts that will make the difference between life and death for someone else. So on behalf of my colleagues I urge all Albertans to discuss organ and tissue donation with their families.

But more importantly, as our hon. minister said, please sign the organ donation declaration on the back of your Alberta health care card. Don’t leave your families to make that hard decision for you in a time of tragedy. Plan ahead, as your gift can save a life. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for St. Albert. Provincial Education System Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is the first day of Education Week, a time for all of us to reflect on the importance of education in our lives and how we as public servants can improve the quality of education in our province.

We are very fortunate in Alberta to enjoy the talents of some of the most talented and committed teachers, administrators, and s upport staff in the entire world along with students of remarkable gifts and potential. Put Alberta kids into a learning environment, and you guarantee that Alberta’s future prosperity and social growth will lead the world for years to come. However, the education system in Alberta remains far from ideal. Teachers and the public face millions of dollars in debt thanks to the unfunded pension liability.

Parents are paying out of pocket for more and more items that were once considered essential, threaten- ing the education prospects of children of poor and middle-class families. My private member’s bill, the School (Restrictions on Fees and Fund-raising) Amendment Act, 2007, will alleviate some of this pressure on Alberta families. Children in Calgary are forced to wait for hours on end because there aren’t enough school buses. Schools are literally falling apart because they’ve been forced to wait for years for maintenance. How can we expect students to learn when they’re facing these very difficult obstacles?

Mr. Speaker, we could and should do much more for education in this province. We should start a publicly funded school enrichment program. We should institute a junior kindergarten program to help children learn during those very critical years. But most importantly we should treat education not as an expense to be tolerated but an investment to be celebrated. The world we live in faces huge challenges. Challenges can only be met by the most creative and well-educated minds. Mr. Speaker, we need to invest in education today.

We need to invest wisely, with a long-term vision for the future of education in this province, with stable, sustainable funding and a commitment to the principles of public education. A quality education for all now and forever: that would sure be a legacy to build for tomorrow’s Alberta. It’s an ambition we should measure when Education Week returns this year and every year thereafter. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Provincial Budget Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Budget betrayal.

The Premier and his new/old cabinet appointees’ honeymoon ended on budget day, Thursday, April 19, 2007. On that day any hopes that Alber- tans had that the new government would be demonstrably more transparent, more accountable, or more responsive to the needs of Albertans were dashed. With the exception of Edmonton Mayor Mandel, the budget was r oundly condemned by many former Conservative supporters for its lack of vision, for its lack of a savings plan, for its patriarchal, red-taped, strings-attached micromanagement of municipal affairs.

This was a short-sighted Conservative grasshopper budget of play now, pay later rather than a provincial Liberal ant budget of planning and setting aside for future needs. It appears that the only plan this government has is to worship the market by buying a ticket on its roller-coaster ride of boom and bust.

The greatest disappointment of all for the increasing number of Albertans living a hand-to-mouth existence one paycheque away from the street was the Premier and his municipal affairs minister’s rejection of the Affordable Housing Task Force’s recommendations of the need to place at least a temporary inflationary cap on rents and consider slowing down the pace of condo conversions. By refusing

April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 697 to implement any of the main recommendations other than meaning- less tinkering which limited unscrupulous landlords to only gouging at whatever rate they wish annually as opposed to every six months, this government proved what many Albertans already knew, that besides having no plan, it is devoid of a social conscience. Albertans want a government that is inclusive, that listens, that acts on its findings for the benefit of the many, not the profits of the few.

Unfortunately, Albertans will have to wait until the next election to select a government with a conscience and a vision. head: Notices of Motions The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly- Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to give notice of a Standing Order 42. It states:

Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly refer Housing First, the report of the Alberta Affordable Housing Task Force, and the government’s response to that report to the Growth Pressures policy field committee constituted under temporary Standing Order 52.01(1)(c), with specific directions to consider and report back on the advisability of introducing temporary rent stability guidelines. Thank you. head: Introduction of Bills The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka. Bill 33 Town of Bashaw and Village of Ferintosh Water Authorization Act Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I request leave to introduce Bill 33, the Town of Bashaw and Village of Ferintosh Water Authorization Act. Mr. Speaker, this bill will allow the village of Ferintosh a safe, secure, and long-term water supply by building a regional waterline that would transfer water from the town of Bashaw. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 33 read a first time] The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that Bill 33 be moved onto the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] head: Tabling Returns and Reports Mr. Liepert: Mr.

Speaker, I’m pleased today to table five copies of a publication titled Students First. This is filled with positive stories about our kindergarten to grade 12 education system. This publica- tion is being distributed across the province and is a small sampling of the collaboration that exists between our education system and has a positive impact on our K to 12 students. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly- Clareview. Mr. Martin: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to table the appropriate number of copies of a letter signed by 224 Albertans.

The letter warns of a looming housing crisis, notes the rapid increase in rental costs, and calls for rent guidelines and rent stability. Thank you very much. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings today. The first is the entire uncensored document I referred to in question period today. It is titled Fiscal Terms Report for Alberta Energy, prepared by Wood Mackenzie, May 2, 2006. In here you can see for yourself the Texas/Alberta government take, and this was excluded under

section 24 from the document that was tabled by the hon. Minister of Energy on April 16. Also, there is a chart in here on the last page of this report which was excluded under

section 24 from the report that was tabled in the Assembly. Again, it’s a government take, and it clearly shows that Alberta is getting a lot less in royalties than those states down south. The second tabling I have today is an internal memorandum to the Auditor General, and it’s in regard to the Public Accounts Commit- tee authority to call witnesses. It’s most interesting to read. Thank you. 2:30 The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I attended the 2007 Alberta film and TV award night.

I’m pleased to table five copies of the program and names of those nominated for the awards. I’m sure we all can be very proud of our Alberta film and TV industry. Thank you. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Dr. B. Miller: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table the appropriate number of copies of notes from a Canadian Natural Resources Limited meeting from February 2006.

The meeting notes include detailed safety requirements for the Horizon oil sands project. head: Tablings to the Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following documents were deposited with the office of the Clerk. On behalf of the hon. Mr. Liepert, Minister of Education, the responses to written questions 31 and 32, asked for by Mr. Chase on behalf of Mr. Flaherty on August 28, 2006. On behalf of the hon. Dr. Morton, Minister of Sustainable Resource Development, return to orders of the Assembly MR 27, 28, and 29, asked for by Mr. Chase on behalf of Mr. Bonko on August 28, 2006.

On behalf of the hon. Mr. Melchin, Minister of Seniors and Community Supports, response to Written Question 2, asked for by Mr. Bonko on behalf of Ms Pastoor on April 16, 2007. On behalf of the hon.

Ms Evans, Minister of Employment, Immigration and Industry, the College of Chiropractors of Alberta radiation health administrative organization annual report for year ended June 30, 2006, and the attached financial statements, College of Chiropractors of Alberta, dated June 30, 2006; Alberta Veterinary Medical Association radiation protection program 2005 annual report with the attached auditor’s report on the radiation protection program dated November 11, 2005; the Alberta Dental Association and College 2005 radiation health and safety program annual report, January 1, 2005, to D ecember 31, 2005, with attached financial

Alberta Hansard April 30, 2007698 statements of the Alberta Dental Association and College radiation administration program dated December 31, 2005; the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta radiation health administrative organization annual report for the period of April 1, 2005, to March 31, 2006; the University of Alberta authorized radiation health administrative organization annual report, 2005-2006; the University of Calgary authorized radiation health administration organization annual report for the period April 1, 2005, to March 31, 2006, with attached financial statements for the years ended March 31, 2006, and 2005; pursuant to the Alberta Economic Development Authority Act the Alberta Economic Development Authority 2005-2006 activity report; pursuant to the Northern Alberta Development Council Act the Northern Alberta Development C ouncil a nnual report 2005-2006; pursuant to the Regulated Accounting Profession Act the Certified General Accountants Association of Alberta 2006 annual report; pursuant to the Veterinary Profession Act the Alberta Veterinary Medical Association annual report, 2006.

On behalf of the hon. Dr. Oberg, Minister of Finance, responses to written questions 1 and 4, as ked for by Mr. Miller on April 16, 2007. Motions Under Standing Order 42 The Deputy Speaker: We have before us a motion under Standing Order 42 which we’ll deal with now. I’ll ask the hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview to make his arguments on the issue of urgency at this time. Referral of Affordable Housing Task Force Report Mr. Martin:

Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly refer Housing First, the report of the Alberta Affordable Housing Task Force, and the government’s response to that report to the Managing Growth Pressures policy field committee constituted under temporary Standing Order 52.01(1)(c), with specific directions to consider and report back on the advisability of introducing temporary rent stability guidelines. Mr. Martin: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. All members have a copy of this notice, so I won’t repeat it.

Basically, what the NDP is proposing is that the Assembly refer the report of the housing task force and the government’s response to the policy field committee on managing growth pressures. Mr. Speaker, I would note that the new Standing Order 52.07(1) states that “a Policy Field Committee shall inquire into, consider and report on any matter referred to it by the Assembly.” Clearly, this motion is in keeping with the spirit of the House leaders’ agreement and the Premier’s desire to create all-party committees which will allow vibrant, open debate on important issues of the day. This is urgent in two senses.

The most obvious, of course, is the urgency for renters and for people seeking rental accommodations. Last week it was reported that people received several- hundred- dollar increases to their rent within hours of the housing task force report being made public. It is by sheer luck that the landlord had already imposed a much smaller increase recently, so the larger one has been delayed. However, many other renters will not be in this good position. We have had a flood of phone calls, letters, e-mails from angry and upset constituents.

People are being put under significant and unnecessary stress because of the possibility of unreasonable and unaffordable rent increases. This continues to hang over their heads, Mr. Speaker. However, the House rules require another kind of urgency; namely, that there will be no other opportunity to debate this motion. I would note that the changes being proposed by the government will be done through regulation, which means that the discussion will once again be behind closed doors, away from Hansard, away from opportunities for the public to watch and even participate in the debate.

There is no other opportunity to discuss the content of the report. The Committee of Supply does not seem appropriate as this is an issue of regulation and not just expenditure. Also, the new system for Committee of Supply is moving away from all-party participation. Which brings us back, Mr. Speaker, to the policy field commit- tees. I know that all the caucuses and even the table officers are still trying to get their heads around how these committees will work. I also note that there has not been any indication from the chairs of when these committees will begin to meet.

Therefore, a motion under Standing Order 42 seems to be the only way that a private member can at this time get a highly important and urgent issue before one of the committees. There is no other provision for this to happen. I would argue, Mr. Speaker, that this is not only a matter of some urgency but also a test of how these committees w ill work. The government itself has created high expectations for how important policy decisions will be made in this province.

When the Standing Orders that created the policy field committees were debated, the Government House Leader went on at great length to explain how these committees would be different from the all-Conservative standing policy committees.

To quote briefly from Hansard at page 611, the Government House Leader was speaking about a problem with the old standing policy committee structure, which was that it did not allow the public to see that kind of input, so a government member could have input at a caucus, input at a standing policy committee, if a member of Agenda and Priorities or the Treasury Board could have input there, but none of that was public policy being made in public. Well, Mr. Speaker, here’s the test.

When this Assembly created the policy field committees, was it serious about taking important issues there for debate, or did the government members imagine that the committees would be only used for easy apple pie and mother- hood issues? To conclude, then, Mr. Speaker, I hope that we can have unani- mous consent to consider this motion. There’s no other opportunity for us to thoroughly debate the need for substantial revisions to the government’s response to the housing report, and there’s no better opportunity for us to test this government’s claims to integrity and openness. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. [Unanimous consent denied] head: 2:40 Orders of the Day head: Written Questions The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that written ques- tions on the Order Paper stand and retain their places. [Motion carried] head: Motions for Returns The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that motions for returns stand and retain their places. [Motion carried]

April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 699 head: Public Bills and Orders Other than Government Bills and Orders Committee of the Whole [Mr. Shariff in the chair] The Deputy Chair: Hon. members, we shall call the committee to order. Bill 203 Service Dogs Act The Deputy Chair: Are there any comments, questions, or amend- ments to be offered with respect to this bill? The hon. Member for Strathcona. Mr. Lougheed: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s a pleasure to rise and start the Committee of the Whole debate on Bill 203, the Service Dogs Act.

I’m appreciative of the support the b ill has received so far in the discussion in second reading and support, I might add, from both sides of this Assembly. I would mention a couple of things before we get into the Committee of the Whole, and these are comments that were made during second reading debate. The hon. Member for Edmonton- Centre raised concerns about the clear tests for certifying the service dogs.

I’d like to point out that there are very good standards that are set out by the Assistance Dogs International group, and the Western Guide and Assistance Dog Society is currently being accredited to train service dogs. This accreditation is a five-year process where trainers must meet standards related to dog handling, dog selection, and compliance with relevant laws. Since the ADI is an internation- ally recognized service dog training organization, the regulations that come out of this act will reflect those ADI standards.

Now, the member was also concerned about access to employ- ment, accommodation, and also government services and programs. There’s a specific clause dealing with occupancy which parallels the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act, and

section 3 protects individuals from discrimination in the workplace and from service providers. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview also raised some concern about the potential of individuals not having ID but actually using a service dog. Certainly, there is going to be a need to consider grandfathering of service dogs that are currently in use but don’t have the specific training or the certification. So that will have to be considered and paid attention to as was done with the Blind Persons’ Rights Act.

Gene rally speaking, to preserve the integrity of this legislation and the intent of it, individuals will have to have their ID with them at all times. If they lose their ID, there’ll be a temporary ID issued; not unlike if one of us loses our driver’s licence, we have to end up getting a temporary driver’s licence. So a temporary identification card would be issued in those cases. Now, the Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner also raised concerns with respect to allergie s, and with respect to guide dogs this has not been a major issue.

Accommodations are being made all the time for different situations like this where there may be sensitivity to animals. There could be some additional problems if there was an amendment that did allow public institutions or employers or businesses the right to not serve persons with service dogs or guide dogs with the intent that they say that there are allergies and concerns in that regard. The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity and the hon.

Member for Lethbridge-East brought up the point about the need for public information and public education to promote the role of service dogs should this bill be passed by this Assembly. That’s been discussed. It’s certainly something that’s very important both with respect to guide dogs that are currently used and in the future if service dogs are also permitted through the passing of this act in the Assembly.

So the ministry, the department, is going to have to take on the role of advising the public more and letting people know about the use of service dogs as well as reminding them about the appropriateness of guide dogs. So, Mr. Chairman, at this point there are two amendments that I would like to move with respect to Bill 203. The Deputy Chair: Hon. member, we need to have the amendments at the desk and also circulated to other members. Make sure that the original is brought to the desk. Hon. members, we shall refer to this amendment as amendment A1. Hon. Member for Strathcona, you may proceed. Mr.

Lougheed: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Now, these amendments deal with

section 1 of the bill.

Section 1(

a) would be amended by removing the word “physical” in the definition of a disabled person.

Section 1(

c) will be amended by removing all the words after “regulations.” With the amendment

section 1(

c) would read: “‘service dog’ means a dog trained as a guide for a disabled person and having the qualifications prescribed by the regulations.” The first amendment reflects concerns heard in the Assembly here and also when talking with persons with disabilities. Generally speaking, the amendment clarifies who can have a service dog. We want to be sure to include all persons who have cognitive disabilities or other functional disabilities as well as people who have physical disabilities, and this will clarify that intent. Many individuals ask about the use of service dogs by persons with autism.

Some time ago in talking with one individual whose son has autism and uses a service dog, he described the use and the benefit of the service dog to him. So this would help to clarify and not exclude somebody like this young fellow. He was six or seven years old, and the family appreciated the use of the service dog to protect and keep safe this young boy. This will clarify that somebody like this six- or seven- year-old would be able to have a service dog. So we would not have any restrictions that way. The amendment also addresses concerns raised by the Member for Edmonton-Centre, who commented that 1(

a) seemed to be a narrow definition. To those who may be concerned that the definition will be too broad, it’s now important to note that the ability to have a service dog is contingent upon the dog being certified through an accredited process, a complicated and difficult and expensive process to go through to get the dog certified.

The process of training, of course, is very leng thy, very costly, and it’s going to limit the number of individuals who would pursue that route. 2:50 The second amendment strengthens the definition of “service dog.” It deletes all the words after “regulations.” It allows Bill 203 to be consistent with the approach in the Blind Persons Rights’ Act. It simplifies the language of the act and ensures that the certificate process will be described in the regulations, and it broadens the range of people with disabilities who have access to the services and narrows the qualification criteria for the dog.

I believe that the amendment improves the intent of the legislation by giving greater clarity to the

definitions of “disabled person” and “service dog” within Bill 203, and I ask for your support on these amendments. Thank you. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity.

Alberta Hansard April 30, 2007700 Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Chair. A little bit of clarification, if you wouldn’t mind. Do we not have to address each of the amend- ments separately and vote on them as such, or can they be dealt with in package format? The Deputy Chair: No. As far as the chair is concerned, this is an amendment that is being dealt with as amendment A1, unless it’s the desire of the Assembly to split it into two. Mr. Chase: No, there wasn’t a desire. It was strictly for clarifica- tion. In that case I’ll speak to both amendments.

I very much appreciate the hon. mover of this bill strengthening what was a good bill to begin with by getting rid of any clarification concerns. Sometimes the term “disabled” has a negative connotation to it, but the reality is that the person is not able to carry on as a fully able-bodied individual would be able to do. Recognizing that, people who have disabilities that are not just of a physical nature but more of a mental nature – and I would suggest that autism fits into that category – are covered by increasing the definition.

In other words, by adding this amendment, it becomes a more inclusive bill, and that’s exactly what we’re trying to do: include people with disabilities into our regular society with as few difficulties as possible. When I spoke earlier of my enthusiasm and support for the bill, I also referred to a young gentleman who I believe was initially prevented from taking his service dog with him to school. If my memory serves me, this young individual was suffering from a degree of autism as well.

By clarifying and further defining the notion that disability was not just limited to physical, this is a very forceful and inclusive amendment. With regard to amendment 2, the definition of a service dog, it removes the statement reading: “or for which an identification card or other certificate has been issued under

section 4.” Again, when praising the bill formerly, I spoke of the confusion that a disabled student at the University of Calgary went through because of the classification of her service dog, which was basically for carrying the books based on the injuries that she had received. Now, my belief in the second amendment is that it’s broadening the qualifications of a service dog such that specific limitations are no longer applied, that dogs and their various talents are recognized, and the qualifications that are required are more of a general nature.

This is the impression I got when formerly speaking to the mover of the amendment, and if that is the case, broadening the qualifications of a dog so that individuals in need are supported, then I very much support the amendment and again congratulate the hon. mover of the bill for his insightful amendments. Thank you. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Mr. R. Miller: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I’ll be brief. I would just like to echo the comments of my colleague from Calgary-Varsity and the hon. Member for Strathcona, particularly in reference to part (

a) of amendment A1 where we’re taking out the word “physical.” I don’t think members of this Assembly need to be reminded that not all disabilities are necessarily easily observed by the human eye, whether we’re talking autism or we’re talking – a great example, actually. I had an impromptu visit from a young lady with a service dog in my constituency office on Friday. This lady is hearing impaired, and the dog has been trained to help her in situations. For instance, it will wake her up when the alarm clock rings in the morning. Or if the doorbell rings, he’ll respond in a certain way.

If the telephone rings, or if somebody else in the household calls her by name, the dog is trained to respond in a number of different ways to inform her as to what is taking place audibly, things that she’s not able to hear herself. To meet her on the street and, quite frankly, even to talk to her, Mr. Chairman – she does wear a hearing aid as well – you would not necessarily clue in to the fact that she was suffering any sort of a disability at all. Taking the word “physical” out of here I think does make this bill that much more inclusive, and that has my full support.

I just wanted to add those comments as well. Thank you. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly- Clareview, followed by Edmonton-Mill Woods. Mr. Martin: Well, thank you. Very quickly, Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill, and the amendments certainly make it better. I appreciate the fact that it would be grandfathered in because this takes time. A lot of people would not know how to go about getting identification. We know how bureaucracies sometimes work. I guess the question that I would have – I think the member alluded to if it was lost, that it hopefully could quickly be retrieved.

But what does “quickly” mean in this day and age? That could be a real handicap if a person did lose it, and it takes a couple of weeks or three weeks. Pretty well, that would be it for him. I would hope that this means that the fact that they don’t necessar- ily have identification does not abrogate their rights under this act if it goes through. Because if there was the case where a person didn’t have it, through loss or whatever, I doubt that they could get it the next day. Knowing how bureaucracies work, it could be a fair length of time if you lost it.

So I would take it that it would be the case that while they’re getting identification, they would still have the rights under this act. If the member would mention if that’s the case. If not, do we need to do some work in that area? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again I’d like to thank the Member for Strathcona for bringing this forward. I really do appreciate the amendments.

I think that the intention was to prohibit discriminatory practices towards individuals with disabili- ties or trainers who are accompanied by a service dog. There was the identification proce ss for service dogs involved in the original act. I see that these amendments will do more for the original intention to bring greater autonomy to individuals with disabilities of any kind and facilitate their social integration by prohibiting discriminatory behaviour against anyone using or training a service dog.

So I believe that this bill provides for dogs who work with humans to be able to do their job more effectively without hindrance and helps to eliminate discrimination towards people who are depending on those dogs. Our passing it puts us on a road to a more human society and one that we can be proud of. I’m happy to support it. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Strathcona. 3:00 Mr. Lougheed: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the comments by the members who spoke just now to the amendment. The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity brought up the student in Calgary.

It’s interesting that about the time we were developing this bill, that issue came forward and really helped to clarify that they can find their rights under the multiculturalism act, and they can find their rights in different ways. But this will help to clarify it and put

April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 701 forward clearly that this young man wouldn’t have had to spend I think it was two weeks at home before he got into school. There were a couple of other comments. One that I would comment on as well is with respect to the ID card. I appreciate that that would be a huge problem if they didn’t have the ID card and something had happened. Currently, I believe the bureaucracy is very quick to react to those circumstances. I’ve heard of no complaints under the Blind Persons’ Rights Act about guide dogs’ identification not being replaced quickly. So it’s something that’s a concern.

I must say that there aren’t a huge number of these dogs around, and the person that is in charge of the program has been able to react quickly to concerns of that nature. I believe that they would continue to be taken care of in a very quick manner. So with that comment, I would ask that all members support this amendment and ask for the question on the amendment. The Deputy Chair: Are you ready for the question? Hon. Members: Question. [Motion on amendment A1 carried] The Deputy Chair: Anybody else on the bill itself? The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate the clarifications and responses that the hon. mover of the bill brought to each of us who expressed not n ecessarily reservations but were looking for confirmation. I appreciated the acknowledgement that there will be a great need for education in order for this bill to truly have its effect. My hon. colleague from Calgary-Mountain View frequently speaks of the need for light and heat in order for things to change, to evolve. For this Bill 203 to evolve and come into effectual practice, what is needed is light in the form of education and heat in the form of enforcement.

For the stigma associated w ith a disability and the stigma associated with dogs, for which many people have a natural fear, a tremendous amount of education is going to have to be provided so that the dog, like the individual who is in need, is accepted by the larger general public. The second part of the analogy, the light and the heat analogy, is the heat. Those individuals who through ignorance of the law or lack of an inclusive nature for whatever reason have a prejudice will have to be dealt with in a firm but fair manner.

We can no longer have restrictions placed on individuals entering public places or going on public transit or for that matter taking a taxi as has been the case previously, which is, I’m sure , one of the motivations for the hon. member to bring forward this great piece of legislation. So, as I say, in order for this to be acceptable, we need to apply the light, the education, and we need to apply the heat – and that’s the enforcement – to make sure th at the intention of this bill is carried out in the realm of reality of public life. Again, thank you very much to the mover of the bill.

The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Leduc-Beaumont-Devon. Mr. Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s a pleasure to rise to join the Committee of the Whole debate on Bill 203, the Service Dogs Act. During second reading of this bill the Member for Strathcona received a treme ndous and unpr ecedented am ount of support from all parties. It was recognized that this sort of legisla- tion is very much needed as it would benefit individuals with disabilities. Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, thanks to the debate and the sharing of ideas, two amendments to

definitions in Bill 203 have been introduced. These are, of course, sections 1(

a) and 1(c). These amendments to

definitions strengthen the Service Dogs Act by adding clarity to the proposed legislation. During the second reading debate the hon. Member for Edmonton- Centre expressed concern regarding the definition of disabled persons under Bill 203. The member thought the definition was narrow. The Service Dogs Act covers individuals defined in the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act as having any degree of disability except blindness or visual impairment and who are dependent upon a service dog. Also, the amendment to the definition of disabled persons in

section 1(

a) further increases the spectrum of individuals who can gain from this legislation because it now clarifies that this bill is intended to include people who have cognitive disabilities and other functional disabilities as well as those who have physical disabilities. Mr. Chairman,

section 3 of the act clearly states that discrimina- tory practices against individuals who use service dogs are abso- lutely prohibited. The clarity of the legislation will help eliminate any ambiguity the public faced regarding the rights of those with service dogs. The amendment to

section 1(

c) will also help Albertans under- stand that identification cards may only be issued to persons with qualified service dogs.

Section 3(1) states that it is prohibited to deny any person or to discriminate against any person with respect to the accommodation, services, or facilities available in any place to which the public is customarily admitted “for the reas on that the person is a disabled person accompanied by a service dog.” With this bill there will no longer be any sort of confusion about not allowing someone with a service dog to enter a restaurant, to rent a hotel room, to go to the dentist, to take a flight or bus, or to go to an athletic facility, for example. Mr. Chairman,

section 3(2) states that it would be absolutely restricted to deny any person or to discriminate against any person with respect to any term or condition of occupancy of any self- contained dwelling unit for the reason that the person is a disabled person accompanied by a service dog. Individuals requiring service dogs would clearly be able to rent any apartment or buy a condo which bans dogs.

With regard to the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multicultural- ism Act, as was previously di scussed during the bill’s second reading, discrimination against individuals with service dogs was prohibited, but the lack of clarity impeded the justice system. Bill 203 provides efficient mechanisms to protect individuals against discrimination committed based on their service dog. If individuals with a disability feel that they have been discriminated against because of their service dogs, they could confidently seek redress through the Service Dogs Act. A clear resolution will be made in a more expedient manner.

The decision on the complaint will be made with clear guidelines and standards, and, Mr. Chairman, I believe that is a wonderful thing. As an alternate avenue individuals with grievances could also bring their complaint to the human rights, citizenship, and multiculturalism commission. In closing, Mr. Chairman, I’m pleased with the two amendments of

definitions which have been brought forth. They solidify Bill 203 because the Service Dogs Act will allow people with disabilities the right to be accompanied by an accredited service dog everywhere the general public is admitted free from discrimination. I support Bill 203, and I urge all hon. members to do the same. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Alberta Hansard April 30, 2007702 The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Calgary-Egmont, followed by West Yellowhead. 3:10 Mr. Herard: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It’s a pleasure to join the Committee of the Whole debate on Bill 203, the Service Dogs Act. Bill 203 is a step forward in the protection of persons with disabilities in Alberta, and I’m very glad to see the support that this bill appears to have from members from all sides of the Assembly. I was also very pleased to see the amendments that the hon. Member for Strathcona has brought forward that have already been passed here today.

I was already very supportive of Bill 203, but those amendments certainly improve the act, and it’s very clear that any ambiguities related to persons with disabilities and identification cards have been removed. The amendments reflect the principle of allowing persons with disab ilities unfettered access to public services in a manner that is free of discrimination. This is also embodied within

section 3 of the act. Public transportation is critical for many people to get to work, to go shopping, to go to stores, medical appointments, and social events. Public transportation is oftentimes more important to persons with a disability because that is often the only form of transportation they have access to. Amending

section 1(

a) will have the effect of broadening the number of persons with disabilities that can access public transportation with their service dogs free of discrimination. People with disabilities in Alberta can already access many forms of transportation. Seventy-nine per cent of Albertans live in municipalities where specialized transportation is available. Fifty thousand Albertans are registered for specialized transportation.

For the most part, Albertans with disabilities have the necessary services available for transportation at present, but without the protection under Bill 203 individuals with service dogs could be refused service on a transit bus, for example. Now, I understand that both Calgary and Edmonton allow service dogs by policy, but having it in legislation I think takes away all of the issues where you might have a municipality, for example, that would not have that policy.

In the case of Edmonton and Calgary service dogs are allowed as a matter of operating policy, but it would be much better to have legal protection provided by provincial laws, and that’s what this bill does. Persons with disabilities also use taxi services, and there is no guarantee that taxi companies currently would permit service dogs in their cabs. Unlike bus drivers taxi drivers refuse service dogs in their cabs because of the ID provisions for the guide dogs in the Blind Persons’ Rights Act. The impact of

section 3 and the fines associated with the discrimi- nation of users of service dogs will act as a deterrent for transporta- tion providers who do not wish to give rides to persons with disabilities. This is a positive action as persons with disabilities have felt helpless in dealing with their situations. Fines for offences as proposed under Bill 203 will be a deterrent to the discrimination of persons with disabilities. As a result, Bill 203 will protect persons with disabilities. So with this positive piece of legislation I believe that

section 3 will help persons with disabilities access transportation services free from discrimination. I would certainly urge all members to vote in favour of the bill. Thank you. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for West-Yellowhead, followed by Calgary-Fort. Mr. Strang: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s great to speak in committee on the Service Dogs Act as amended, extending service dogs protections similar to those that the Blind Persons’ Rights Act extends to guide dogs. These are important protections for people with disabilities. While this act offers this protection to the person with the disability, it also protects the interests of the general public.

Section 1(

c) as amended makes it clear that the service dog is a dog that has been specifically trained as a guide for a disabled person and has the qualifications established by regulations by the responsible minister. The minister will not be starting from scratch in develop- ing these regulations. One organization that has already developed standards for training and conduct of service dogs is Assistance Dogs International.

Part of ADI’s mission is to “establish and promote standards of excel- lence in all areas of Assistance Dog acquisition, training and partnership.” Members of ADI meet regularly to share ideas, attend seminars, and conduct business, regarding such things as educating the public about service dogs, legal rights of people with disabilities partnered with service dogs, setting standards and established guidelines, the ethics of training of these dogs, and improving the utilization and bonding of each team. The standards set by ADI are basic guidelines that members must follow, which they are encouraged to excel in.

The training standards are high. Many dogs fail training because they do not have the temperament to be good service dogs. These include stipulations that the service dog responds to basic obedience and skill tasks commanded 90 per cent of the time at the first ask in both public and home environments. Every once in a while there is a news story about a dog attacking a person. The public need not worry about aggressive service dogs.

One ethical standard that members of ADI must adhere to is the public right to expect an assistance dog to be under control at all times and that these dogs exhibit no inherent behaviour in public.

Section 3(4) of the bill holds that standard, withholding protection for service dog teams if the dog is not well behaved. Service dogs are taught to remain in their handler’s control at all times. Service dogs fail the training process if they bite, snap, growl, or are otherwise aggressive or if they bark inappropriately. The regulations of the service dog qualifications in

section 1(

c) of the act ensure that Albertans with disabilities will benefit from service dog training to the highest standard and assure all Albertans that they should feel comfortable about service dog behaviours. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort, followed by Cypress-Medicine Hat. Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today to contribute to the Committee of the Whole debate on Bill 203, the Service Dogs Act. Through a very positive second reading debate two amend- ments to the

definitions within the legislation have been brought forth to strengthen the bill. The debate was characterized by two common themes among many: members sharing stories of their constituents and friends who stand to benefit from Bill 203 and also members of this Assembly agreeing that the Service Dogs Act should be supported because of the positive impact it will have on people’s lives. One of the main reasons that this act has been so successful in the House is that it seeks to enhance the quality of life of Albertans.

When a member presents an opportunity to help other Albertans, we are eager to further that cause by lending support to the member. The first proposed amendment to the definition of disabled person

April 30, 2007 Alberta Hansard 703 will further enhance the quality of life for more Albertans, and omitting the word “physical” in

section 1(

a) will clarify that this bill is intended to include people who have cognitive disabilities and other functional disabilities and physical disabilities. One of many ways Bill 203 will enhance quality of life for more Albertans with a disability is by breaking down as many barriers to these individuals as possible. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, one of these barriers is not so much based on disability but, rather, the public’s miseducation about service dogs.

Section 3 of the Service Dogs Act will ensure that the righ ts of Albertans with disabilities who require the assist