June 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1531 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Tuesday, June 5, 2007 1:00 p.m. Date: 07/06/05 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Let us pray. Give to each member of this Legislature a strong and abiding sense of the great responsibilities laid upon us. Give us a deep and thorough understanding of the needs of the people we serve. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Energy. Mr. Knight: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly some important members of the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board. Mr. Brad McManus has been acting chairman of the EUB for over two months now, and his handling of this challenging task deserves recognition here today. Taking the reins of an organization in an interim capacity, especially one as dynamic and robust as the EUB, is not something that many individuals are suited for.

Thankfully, the culmination of his experiences, including that as a member of the Public Utilities Board of Alberta, has served him well in this position and has enabled him to step up in a leadership role during this time of transition. Joining him today, Mr. Speaker, the talented Rich Jones, who was kind enough to make time to join us again today. I would ask Brad and Rich, who are seated in the members’ gallery, to please stand and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m privileged to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly quite a number of guests who are in the public gallery. I will proceed through the names fairly quickly because of the number.

I’d like to introduce Indira Saroya, vice-president of the Alberta women’s commission; Jagjit Singh Gill, president of the Gurdwara Singh Sabha; Darshan Singh Gill, former president of the Gurdwara Singh Sabha; Baljinder Singh Sandhu, president of Khalsa school; Jagjit Singh Sidhu, principal of Headway school; Reverend Patras Bhatti; Jagda Chanan; Surinder Deol, Punjabi Art Association; Sanjeevan Singh, Punjabi Art Association; Narinder Singh Bhui, president of the Gurdwara, Mill Woods; Paramjit Singh Ubhi, senior vice-president, Gurdwara, Mill W oods; Surinder Singh Hunjan, general secretary of the Gurdwara, Mill Woods; and Balbir Singh Kular, president of Mill Woods cultural society.

I would ask the people I’ve named to please rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s my great honour and pleasure to rise and introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly 10 outstanding community leaders. They are seated in the public galle ry. I want to thank them for coming to the Legislature. Allow me to read their names. Dr.

Shahab Ahmad, director, Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Edmon- ton; Gurbhulinder Singh Sandu, editor, Des Pardes Punjabi news; Kamal Layal, director, Des Pardes Punjabi news; Joginder Singh Pannu, president, Gurdwara Guru Nanak; Skattar Singh Sandhu, chairman, Nagar Kirtan committee; Charan Singh Sagoo, chairman, Indo-Canadian liaison committee of Edmonton; Aman Gill, co-chair, Indo-Canadian committee of Edmonton and also a candidate for the Edmonton-Mill Creek riding for the Alberta Liberals; Dr.

Prithviray Kalia, president, Maple Leaf Writers Foundation of Edmonton; Sohail Quadri, president, Pakistan-Canada Association; Yogesh Ashta, editor, Wildrose Times; Vilmal Sharma, director, Wildrose Times. I request them to please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. Thank you very much. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a number of wonderful leaders from Mill Woods.

The first is Chander Mittal, president of the Bh artiya Cultural Society; Amar jit Sohi, spokesman for the Mill Woods crime council and candidate for ward 6 in the civic election; Gurcharn Buttar, host, Radio Sur Sangam; Mewa Singh Phul, vice-president of the Ramgarhia cultural association; Jaspal Singh Bansal, treasurer of the Ramgarhia cultural association; Sital Singh Nanuan, spokesman for the Sikh Federation and president of the Mill Woods-Beaumont Liberal association; Rukhsana Amin, president of th e Multicultural Society; Sofia Yakub, president, arts and crafts centre; Naimat Khan, president of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Edmonton.

I’d like them to rise and accept the warm and traditional welcome from the Assem- bly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Mr. Taylor: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the Member for St. Albert it is my great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of the House today 11 members of the St. Albert Red Hat Society. This particular

chapter is known as the SALSA chapter, which stands for St. Albert Ladies with a Sassy Attitude. If all 11 sassy ladies would please stand and accept the warm welcome of the House. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m delighted to introduce to you and through you to this Assembly two picketers from the Palace Casino strike, which is now in its 270th day due to this government’s refusal to pass first contract legislation. Their names are Mark Mendoza and Jason Hnidan.

Mark has been at the Palace Casino for two years in the slot department as a cashier. He enjoys outdoor activities like running and mountain biking. At the moment he’s saving for school to be a civil engineer. Jason has been a poker dealer for two years and before that worked in computer sales and still enjoys working in that field. Accompanying them is bargaining committee member Richard Konkin and UFCW 401 member Tania Wiest. I would now ask that they all rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar.

Alberta Hansard June 5, 20071532 National Hunger Awareness Day Rev. Abbott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to recognize and bring attention to June 5 as th e inaugural National Hunger Aware- ness Day, a day that raises awareness about a solvable problem. Alberta’s farm and ranch families are proud of our province’s productive agricultural sector and are doing their

part in a province where agriculture is such a vital part of our economy and food supply. In our agricultural sector we are looking at our practices and are committed to ongoing work to develop innovative, sustainable agricultural systems. We are continuing to find ways that encourage greater local food supplies, that in turn make f ood purchases more affordable for Albertans. Eliminating hunger will also be achieved through greater collabo- ration amongst organizations, businesses, and individuals.

For example, in Edmonton, Calgary, Leduc, and Olds residents are participating in the Plant a Row, Grow a Row program, that encourages local gardeners to plant an extra row of produce for their local food bank. This program demonstrates how solutions can sometimes be found, literally, in our own backyard. Building on the idea of people helping people, this unique program provides a simple way to get involved and make a meaningful difference in your community. This approach not only contributes thousands of pounds of produce for local food banks but also helps build and foster community spirit.

We hope that innovative approaches like this continue to grow in other communities across Alberta. As people prepare for summer activities, this is a good time to remind everyone that the actions of even one person can help make a difference. All Albertans can play a part by volunteering in their community and donating food and funds during special event food drives. I would like to acknowledge the efforts made by food banks and Albertans across the province in bringing awareness to this issue and working together for the less fortunate. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 1:10 The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne. Seniors’ Week 2007 Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise to invite all Albertans to join me in celebrating Seniors’ Week 2007 from June 4 to June 10. This special week is an opportunity to recognize our parents, grandparents, and older friends and neighbours for the difference that they make in our lives every day. One of these special people is my mom, who continues to amaze me with her wisdom, humour, and thought-provoking questions. My life is much richer because of her.

I know that this is the case for many Albertans who think of a senior in their life when asked to name someone who has helped them to be happier, healthier, and smarter. Many families benefit from having a grandparent to help with their kids or provide advice to a mom or dad when they’re in need of it most. Alberta’s seniors have made enormous contributions to our province. Their hard work helped to build this province into the vibrant place it is today, and their involvement in our communities will continue to benefit Albertans of all ages for generations to come.

I’m proud to be the chair of the Seniors Advisory Council for Alberta, which leads the annual Seniors’ Week celebrations. This year’s Seniors’ Week theme, Celebrate Seniors’ Present and Future Contributions, recognizes that seniors are and will remain key to a strong and prosperous province. I encourage Albertans to participate in Seniors’ Week events and to thank the seniors who have made their lives better. A calendar of events being held across the province is available on the Seniors and Community Supports website. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Leduc-Beaumont-Devon. Nate Gartke Mr.

Rogers: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my privilege and honour to acknowledge an outstanding young Alberta student from right here in the capital region who recently claimed second place in the 2007 Scripps National Spelling Bee in Washington, DC. Nate Gartke is a 13-year-old grade 8 student from Victoria School of Performing and Visual Arts, who lives in Spruce Grove. Nate out- spelled 284 out of 285 other participants from across Canada and the United States. He has truly de monstrated his tremendous aptitude when it comes to spelling.

He advanced from regionally sponsored competitions in Canada to compete in the national competition in Washington, DC, as I mentioned before, winning second place on May 31. This was Nate’s first year par ticipating in the Scripps National Spelling Bee, while many of his opponents were competing for their second, third, and even a fifth time, Mr. Speaker. Nate’s preparation and training helped him outperfo rm all but one of his opponents. After several hours of elimination rounds Nate was stumped by the word “coryza” in the 11th and 12th r ounds. Please allow me to define that word for you.

The word coryza is spelled c-o-r-y-z-a, and it is the swelling of the mucous membrane in the nose as caused by a cold. Mr. Speaker, we can all take comfort in knowing that Alberta’s education system is turning out wonderful students like Nate. This is highlighted by the fact that he is the second Alberta student in a row to place second in this prestigious competition. This young man is supported at all levels: by his school, his community, and his loving family. It’s no surprise that Nate’s parents, both of whom are educators, have raised a competitive, intelligent, and humble young man.

The Speaker: Well, all 82 members got that one right, didn’t they? So I’ve got a test for you, hon. member. Honour: is it h-o-n-o-r or h-o-n-o-u-r? We’ll move on now to the hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Family and Community Support Services Association Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I recognize an organization that’s been on the Alberta scene for 40 years and has made a significant contribution. The Family and Community Support Services Association was crucial in shifting us from a palliative to a preventative approach to social services.

It has been an advocate of decision-making at the level that issues impact. As specialties increase, FCSS remains committed to volunteerism as an opportunity to involve the community. In Hebrew thought 40 years represents completion of a cycle. There were 40 days of testing in the wilderness, the 40 days and nights of the flood, and for 40 years the escaped slaves wandered as nomads. Each of these marks a transition: the end of one state and the beginning of a new one. Alberta has changed significantly in 40 years.

New citizens coming here do not have the type of in-house networks to turn to, in child care for instance, that earlier Albertans did. They have brought new networks, new challenges, new opportunities. Human need has not gone away. It has taken new and acute forms.

June 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1533 I say that our most important task is reframing how we look at human need. We have to recognize that those who look to us for help offer us ways to affirm our humanity in serving theirs. What results is mutual sharing, not a division into donors and r eceivers. This cannot be funded in the old way of having agencies coming to government begging us as in the moving Oliver! with a plaintive, “Please, sir, may I have some more?” It’s time to give the fifth sector resources to meet challenges proactively. It’s time for a mentality of investment rather than bottom line.

It’s time to index budgets to rising costs. It’s time to take the truth that we are our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers as a baseline and go beyond to recognize that in community when one suffers, all suffer, and as one benefits, all do. FCSS is an important

part in bringing us to that awareness. Alberta Water Quality Awareness Day Dr. Brown: Mr. Speaker, today is Alberta Water Quality Awareness Day. This is a province-wide program initiated by the Alberta Lake Management Society to increase awareness of watershed health and water quality through hands-on water testing. It is modelled after the World Water Monitoring Day that was created in 2002 to connect people personally with efforts to preserve their local water sources. The test covers four basic measures for water quality, including temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and turbidity.

Through this successful program participants are provided with free water quality test kits and are able to learn about water quality and to gather information on local waterways. They can then contribute their findings to the online database and watershed map. Participation in the test helps Albertans to gain an understanding of the health of their watersheds, to provide input into a province-wide snapshot of water quality, and to become involved in watersheds at a local level. The program improves public knowledge and appreciation that will in turn help lead to effective management. Mr.

Speaker, every year our population grows, and along with it comes increasing demands on our province’s waters. Albertans recognize that water is our greatest resource and are determined to ensure that abundant, high-quality water will be ours to enjoy now and in the future. The Speaker: The hon. leader of the third party. Royalty Review Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The results of the Royalty Review Panel will be a clear demonstration of whose side this government is on, and it looks like it’s not the side of working and middle-class Albertans.

At a time when energy companies are reporting record profits, the Minister of Finance has undermined the review, telling Albertans to lower their expectations. The minister is rightly concerned about the political fallout the Conservatives risk by once again putting the energy companies’ interests first. There’s a direct link between our overheated economy, record oil profits, and the economic and social pressures facing working Albertans. The strong Canadian dollar, fuelled largely by energy exports to the U.S., means that the government spending for Albertans does not go as far as it used to.

So, too, the energy-fuelled boom is quickly making many Albertans go bust as they face rising rents and a lack of affordable housing. Rather than raising royalties to offset these pressures on Albe rtans, the government is getting ready to protect already record-setting oil profits. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why the Conservatives are so eager to keep the status quo on royalties. Just follow the money. The Conservative Party and its leadership contestants have long been supported by energy companies.

For example, EnCana, which posted a record-breaking profit of $6.5 billion in 2006, shared over $10,000 of that wealth with the PC Party and donated between $1,000 and $5,000 to the Premier’s leadership campaign. The list goes on with a who’s who of big energy companies who donate hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Conservative Party every year, and the list is not that much different on the Liberal side of the House. While places like Alaska and Norway have captured significant value from their energy resources, the Conservatives have squan- dered our opportunity with low royalty rates.

The price of oil has tripled since the current royalty regime was put in place. Texans are getting 25 per cent on royalties while Albertans get only 1 cent on the dollar for many projects. head: 1:20 Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Bow. Ms DeLong: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Standing Committee on Private Bills has had a certain bill under consideration and wishes to report as follows. The committee recommends that the following private bill proceed with amendments: Bill Pr. 1, CyberPol – The Global Centre for Securing Cyberspace Act.

As part of this report I will be tabling five copies of the proposed amend- ments. I request the concurrence of the Assembly in this recommen- dation. The Speaker: Would all hon. members in favour of the report please say aye. Hon. Members: Aye. The Speaker: Those opposed, please say no. It’s carried. head: Presenting Petitions The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m continuing with the tabling of petitions today.

I am submitting 231 signatures, and the petition reads: We, the undersigned residents . . . hereby petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government to: 1. Ensure that the remuneration paid to employees working with people with disabilities is standardized across the sector, regardless of whether these workers are employed by govern- ment or by community-based or private providers; 2. Ensure these employees are fairly compensated and that their wages remain competitive . . . 3. Improve employees’ access to professional development opportunities (training and upgrading); and 4.

Introduce province-wide service and outcomes-focused level- of-care standards. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Decore. Mr. Bonko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have 162 signatures on a petition that reads: We, the undersigned residents of Alberta, hereby petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to take immediate, meaningful measures to help low-income, fixed-income

Alberta Hansard June 5, 20071534 Albertans, Albertans with disabilities and those . . . hard-to-house maintain their places of residence and cope with the escalating and frequent increases in their monthly rental costs. head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Creek. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to table the appropriate number of copies of the Alberta Health Facilities Review Committee annual report for 2005-06. As members here would know, I’m privileged to chair this particular committee at this time.

It’s a committee that monitors care and promotes high standards for patients in Alberta’s health care facilities. In my final sentence I’d just like to say thank you to the hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat, who was the chair and steward of the committee at this time, ’05-06. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I’d like to table five copies of correspondence from a constituent, Brandi Roach, who’s very concerned about the uncontrolled growth of Alberta’s economy and notes that “the so-called ‘price of prosperity’ is not distributed equally and income levels simply cannot keep up with the rising cost of living.” She’s seeing that current circumstances are benefiting a very small, select group of people. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings today as chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

The first is a letter dated May 28, 2007, to Dr. David Marshall, president of Mount Royal College, requesting confirma- tion to attend the Public Accounts Committee on Tuesday, October 16, 2007, from 1 to 3 p.m. The second letter I have is also dated May 28, 2007, and this is to Dr. Harvey Weingarten, president and vice-chancellor, University of Calgary. This is requesting confirmation to attend the Public Accounts Committee here on Wednesday, October 17, 2007, from 1 to 3 p.m. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a letter from Herman Ansink, a constituent, who is writing to support antismoking legislation. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two sets of tablings today. One is the program for the Northern Alberta Brain Injury kick-off breakfast and kick-off for Brain Injury Awareness Week, which I attended on Friday morning. Ed Hervey of our Edmonton Eskimos gave quite a moving speech at that particular event. The other tabling is a program for the 75th birthday party of Father Bernie Gilliece of St. Dominic’s Catholic parish in Edmonton-Manning.

Four hundred tickets were sold, Mr. Speaker. Archbishop Emeritus MacNeil and many other honoured guests travelled from near and far. I told a bad joke, and a good time was had by all. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I am tabling eight letters from Albertans who are concerned about the government’s handling of the teachers’ unf unded pension liability. They’re disappointed that the government won’t sit down and negotiate.

There are Dawn Duffy, Henri Chauvet, Tanya Oppedisano, Anita Kilpatrick, Helen Ford, Patrick Duffy, Lee Boylan, and Paul Sevigny. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I am tabling five copies of the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra’s May-June 2007 Signature magazine. The magazine was given to me on Saturday, May 26, at the Winspear, when I attended the salute to the troops, an afternoon with the Canadian Brass. It was a wonderful event. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have six tablings today. The first set contains correspondence from the summer village of Norris Beach, the village of Longview, the city of St. Albert, and the municipal district of Lesser Slave River, indicating their top three infrastructure prio rities and transportation. Like so many other Alberta municipalities funding for water treatment is their common concern. My second set of tablings involves the municipality of Jasper, the town of Taber, and the village of Sangudo, which I described in great detail during the Infrastructure budget debate.

Again, the common concern is provincial funding for waste-water management. My third tabling is an e-mail from Fred Jack of Swan Hills, who notes: I think it’s great the Alberta government is l ooking at affordable housing. However, I think it must look at this concept wider and not just [look at] the lowest 10 per cent of income earners, and people who need an expensive housing and shelter. My fourth tabling comes from Kathy L. Belton, who has an M.Ed. degree, who is the director of the Alberta Centre for Injury Control & Research at the University of Alberta.

This tabling is a position paper on demerit points to increase compliance for occupant restraint. Kathy notes that “research suggests an [Alberta] savings of 478 million could be realized by increasing the usage of seat belts by motor vehicle occupants.” My fifth tabling is a series of essays from students James Michael Rinehart, Carrie Jance, Cameron Tompkins, and Andrew Osborne in support of my Motion 510, to lower the voting age to 16.

My sixth and final tabling, a letter, comes from a teacher in my constituency in support of my Motion 510 on lowering the voting age to 16 and my second, Motion 511, which calls for the establish- ment of a unified family court. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Tablings to the Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following documents were deposited with the office of the Clerk.

On behalf of the Minister of Health and Wellness, pursuant to the Health Professions Act, the College of Licensed Practical Nurses of Alberta 2006 annual report, the College of Registered Dental Hygienists of Alberta 2006 annual report.

June 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1535 *These spellings could not be verified at the time of publication. On behalf of the Minister of Advanced Education and Technol- ogy, pursuant to the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Science and Engineering Research Act, the Alberta ingenuity fund annual report 2003-2004, the Alberta ingenuity fund tri-annual report 2000-2003. On behalf of the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation responses to questions raised by the hon. Member for Calgary- Varsity on May 15, 2007, Department of Infrastructure and Trans- portation 2007-2008 main estimates debate.

On behalf of the Minister of Education responses to questions raised by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning on May 16, 2007, Department of Education 2007-2008 main estimates. Responses to questions raised by the hon. Member for Edmonton- Beverly-Clareview on May 29, 2007, Department of Education 2007-2008 main estimates debate. The Speaker: Hon. members, might we revert briefly to Introduc- tion of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (continued) The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you so much, Mr. Speaker.

I’m very pleased to introduce a group under the leadership of Mrs. Andrea Cooper. They are students from Belgravia elementary school, which is a fine school. I am a graduate of that school as is the Member for Edmonton-Centre. The group here includes 33 people in total, and the parent helpers coming along are Gwen Berdan and Yvette Maskell. I’d ask them to please rise – I believe they’re in the members’ gallery – and I’d ask all MLAs to give them a warm welcome. Thank you very much. 1:30 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat. Mr. Mitzel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to members of this House guests from the Sun Country Christian school in Bow Island. They are accompanied by teachers Mrs. Christine Barkman*, Mr. Terry Barkman; their group leader, Mr. Kelly Reimer; and parent helpers Mrs. Wendy Reimer, Mr. and Mrs. Weldon and Brenda Reimer, Mr. and Mrs. Brian and Laura Thiessen*, and Mrs. Laura Isaac*. I would ask them to please rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition.

Contribution to Premier’s Leadership Campaign Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier’s campaign team sought a donation that the Premier now admits was unethical. He claims not to have known about it and is blaming another fundrais- ing misstep, another stumble, on volunteers. Well, we’ll be looking for some accountability.

Section 602.34 of the Municipal Govern- ment Act requires commissions to prepare a financial information return on their financial affairs for the year and to submit this along with audited financial statements to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. My question is to that minister. Can the minister confirm whether this donation, a $10,000 expenditure that has nothing to do with its provincial mandate, was reported in these documents? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, at this time I cannot, but I will defi- nitely find the information and bring it to this House. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr.

Taft: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I look forward to that. The minutes of the commission reveal that the chief administra- tive officer recommended to the board of the commission that they donate $25,000 to the Premier’s leadership campaign. The largest donations disclosed by the Premier were between $10,000 and $15,000, but the CAO recommended $25,000. I hope the minister will agree that political allegiances should not come into the CAO’s recommendations.

To the minister: will the minister admit that this recommendation for a political donation from the chief administra- tive officer of this commission was improper? Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, what would be obvious from the presentation there is that that administrator knows what a disaster for Alberta a Liberal government would be. Obviously, in a leadership campaign there are literally hundreds of volunteers working across all of the many leadership candidates. They are involved in all the aspects: some fundraising, some doing mail-outs. It’s a very busy time.

At the end of the leadership campaign the Premier’s campaign team sat down and reviewed all contributions to find out if there were any that were made improperly, and they were returned. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This commission in question has ambitious expansion plans and is in fact seeking reapproval of its licence from this government even as we speak, yet this donation clearly demonstrates that the commission is operating outside of its provincial mandate, which has nothing to do with political dona- tions, spending money on helping the Premier win the leadership race rather than on waste management services for its shareholders. To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Section 602.35 of the Municipal Government Act enables the minister to call for an inspection of a commission. Will this minister initiate a full inspection of this commission, and will he do it before its licence is renewed? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, it is indeed in the authority of municipal affairs to be able to call an inspection on municipalities, also on commissions. As I answered in the first question, I am going to find out whether there was any donation made, what exactly did happen, and I will report. The Speaker: Second Official O pposition question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition.

Economic Strategy Dr. Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Only a PC government in power for 36 consecutive years without any real vision for the future would start lowering expectations. Yesterday the Minister of Education spoke about the Tory government hitting a financial wall. He said, and I quote: Do the math. The big days of budgetary surpluses are behind us. End quote. My question is to the President of the Treasury Board. Doesn’t this just confirm what so many

Alberta Hansard June 5, 20071536 people are now saying, that this Conservative government has failed – has completely failed – to manage Alberta’s wealth? Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure how prudent financial planning, having a sustainability fund and having a capital fund and budgeting for cost overruns and balancing our budgets and paying off our debt and creating huge surpluses for Alberta, is a bad plan.

We on this side of the House, qu ite frankly, think that spending money like it’s supposed to be spent – carefully planning, saving, reinvesting – is all part of a great plan that’s contributed to 36 years of very good government. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you. You know, Mr. Speaker, this Tory government has received nearly $220 billion in oil and gas revenues since it was first elected if you adjust for inflation. As we know – and the Treasury president is confirming that – they’ve spent it as if there was no tomorrow. Well, tomorrow is arriving.

The Education minister is voicing concerns about this government’s ability to continue providing something as basic as elementary schools. My question is to the President of the Treasury Board. When will this government deliver a serious long-term plan that ensures a sustain- able financial future for this province? Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, while financial planning is critically important to any government, this party, this government also understands about the tremendous human aspect that a budget needs to include. That’s why we spend more on health care than any other province.

That’s why we spend nearly $6 billion on education. That’s why we spend billions on advanced education. We’re continuing to work and to spread our economy to increase the revenue streams because it’s not all a bout money. This province was built by hard work. They expect good money management, but they also don’t want us to turn our backs on the rest of Canada as the Liberals would like to do by somehow inferring that all of the revenue should come to Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, my question will be to the same minister.

This government has, as I said, taken in about $220 billion in nonrenewable resource revenue since it was first elected, an unbelievable amount. Yet even though it is spending more per capita than any other province, which the Treasury president is so proud of, it can’t even deliver basics like roads and schools. To the President of the Treasury Board: can this minister explain how it is that his government is spending so much but can’t even deliver basics like schools? Mr. Snelgrove: I honestly don’t know where the hon. Leader of the Opposition lives. I think we have 76 schools under construction right now, 76.

We have population that’s growing out. Certainly, Mr. Speaker, in a population of students that hasn’t grown, the increase in spending in education has been enormous, the highest funding education system in Canada. But when the people move away from the schools, it’s really difficult to take their schools with them. We are in the middle of working with other ways, alternative financing and bundling, to put schools in the high-growth areas of the bigger cities, and we’re able to do that because we have been prudent money managers. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon.

Member for Calgary-Currie. 1:40 Western Irrigation District Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It appears that the govern- ment of Alberta is now turning to the Western irrigation district for water for the Balzac project. For information purposes, this memorandum of understanding between the WID and the MD of Rocky View would be about plan D for a water supply. Now, an irrigation district’s mandate is clearly for irrigation purposes. According to the district’s 2006 annual report, the WID is part of the Alberta Crown and is listed as a tax-exempt government of Alberta agency.

To the Minister of Agriculture and Food: can the minister deny now that this government has made a secret deal to supply water for a horse-racing track? The Western irrigation district is, after all, under provincial control. Mr. Groeneveld: No secret deal, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, the Irrigation Districts Act says that if an irrigation district wants to transfer part of its water licence, it has to hold a plebiscite and can only make the application for a transfer of the allocation if more than 50 per cent of the irrigators vote in favour.

Of course, as usual with the Conservatives, there’s a way out of that one. The minister can overrule the plebiscite requirement if the board establishes that there’s no risk to water supply. It would be quite interesting to see the minister make the argument that providing the badly needed water for irrigation to a horse track, casino, and megamall is somehow in the public interest. To the same minister: will the minister make a commitment right now that he will allow the plebiscite to take place and that he will abide by the wishes of the irrigators in the municipalities serviced by the WID? Mr.

Groeneveld: Well, that’s a great question, Mr. Speaker. I wonder why he asked the first one if he knew that one. It’s a little strange to me. I certainly will encourage the WID to hold its public meeting. They’ve indicated that they’re going to do so. Why would we have a problem with them holding a public meeting to see what the irrigators feel about the whole project? The WID makes a strong argument that the transfer of water will be taken out of the efficien- cies they have gained throughout the system. Mr. Taylor: Well, Mr. Speaker, that was, I guess, an answer to

part 1 of my excellent question or however he described it. But

part 2 went like this: will the minister make a commitment right now to abide by the wishes of the irrigators in the municipalities serviced by the WID and not use

section 11(6) to avoid asking the people what they want? Mr. Snelgrove: It’s amazing. He asks a question that is unanswer- able, he puts an answer in that isn’t real, and then he bases his supplementary question on his answer that he provided to a question that doesn’t apply if there’s no deal. You know, it’s amazing. I don’t know why they call it question period, because he’s got all the answers, and he doesn’t even understand the question. The Speaker: The hon. leader of the third party. Strength of Canadian Dollar Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

There are some very serious issues facing the people of this province, and I’d like to deal with one. The Minister of Education has claimed that the higher Canadian dollar means that the days of large budget surpluses are behind us. He goes on to say that Alberta may soon hit a revenue wall and tells school boards across Alberta to think about

June 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1537 the hard facts of the funding they’re likely to receive. My question is to the Minister of Finance. Is it the position of the government that the higher dollar means that Albertans need to lower their already modest expectations, or is his colleague the Education minister simply engaging in some clumsy negotiations with Alberta teachers through the media? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As the hon. member, I’m sure, knows, for every one-cent increase in the Canadian dollar it actually costs Alberta taxpayers roughly $123 million.

In our budget the Canadian dollar is set at 86 cents. In February of this year the Canadian dollar was 84 cents. Many of us said that perhaps 86 cents was even a little bit too high. Well, in reality what has occurred is that we’ve seen a 10-cent increase in the Canadian dollar in the last four months, with it supposedly going up to eventually being at par by the end of the year. It’s what the experts are saying. This does have ramifications for our budget and, indeed, potentially could be as high as one and a half billion dollars. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Then I ask the Minister of Finance why, given that most economists believe that the increased export value of oil from this province to the United States is a major cause for the rise of the Alberta dollar, this government didn’t see it coming, why they set the estimate in the budget at an 86-cent dollar when they should have known that the Canadian dollar was going north at a real high rate precisely because of Alberta’s export of oil to the United States? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, many of us would like to think it is an Alberta dollar, but it’s actually a Canadian dollar.

Despite what the socialist economists actually look at, one of the real reasons why we’re seeing the strength of the Canadian dollar is not necessarily the strength of the dollar, but it’s the falling of the U.S. dollar which in relative terms puts our dollar up. This is a multifaceted issue. It is not – and I respectfully say it is not – purely because of Alberta’s exports. As a matter of fact, we’ve had higher exports at higher prices, and we have not seen the Canadian dollar act this way in the past. Mr.

Mason: I’m surprised to learn that we actually have had higher prices for our oil than in the recent period. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the minister if he doesn’t think that it’s high time to quit messing around with a phony task force that’s looking at royalties and just raise royalties so that Albertans get a reasonable return on the resources which they own. Why don’t you do it, Mr. Minister? Raise royalties now. Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, what we have committed to and what this Premier has committed to is looking at the royalties from a very holistic point of view.

We appointed six very good, very dedicated, and very intelligent people to take a look at the royalty system in Alberta. What we must remember in Alberta is that there is not simply one royalty. There are very close to 50 to 100 different royalty patterns that are out there, depending on the type of well, depending on the type of research. The Royalty Review Panel has been charged with looking at all of them. They’ve been charged with taking a look at what is fair share for Albertans versus what will keep the economic activity in Alberta going, and that’s what they’re going do. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Red Deer-North, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Support for Seniors Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This week is Seniors’ Week, our chance to celebrate older Albertans who contribute so much to our communities. Our se niors worked hard to create the strong and prosperous province we all enjoy today. For some the very prosperity they created seems to have come with an unwelcome price. With the province’s cost of living at an all-time high some seniors are finding it difficult to make ends meet. My question today is to the Minister of Seniors and Community Supports.

What is the government doing to help seniors deal with rising living costs? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to first express my appreciation to the many seniors in this province. We are very fortunate to have a tremendous heritage. We’ve been richly blessed with a number of seniors that have built this province, and I would like to say that we have one of the most comprehensive packages of anywhere in this country. Over $2 billion are actually provided for program services in one form or another to support the seniors in this province.

The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One of the biggest concerns that I’ve heard from seniors in my constituency is that they have a safe place to live. My sec ond question is to the same minister. What is the government doing to ensure that seniors have a safe place to live in the communities that they helped to build? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d first like to clarify, in case there was any misunderstanding, that over $2 billion are provided in various supports by this government.

They go from Alberta seniors’ benefit, the special-needs assistance, dental and optical. But with respect to helpin g them stay in place, the first priority is to let and to help seniors live in place. About two-thirds, 67 per cent, of seniors own their own home. It’s in response to that that we’ve had the education property tax relief for those for the rising cost of property taxes. It’s our home care policies that help them facilitate being able to stay in their home. That is our first and ongoing priority. Secondly, we look to: how can we help them stay within their own community?

As their health and those things deteriorate, we . . . The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you. My last question to the same minister: what is the minister doing to prepare the province to meet the needs of a growing seniors population? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The seniors demographics: not just in this province, clearly in this continent there is a growing population of seniors. One of the mandates from the Premier is the demographic planning commission, and we are consulting and working with seniors on how we plan for the next generation coming

Alberta Hansard June 5, 20071538 up, the growing numbers of people that will be seniors. It’s with the groups like the Seniors Advisory C ouncil, that’s chaired by the Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne, that we do make sure we’re getting out and speaking with seniors, consulting around the province to ensure that the programs are in place and designed specifically for the future needs as well. That will be part of the ongoing things we’ll do with the demographic planning commission. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie, followed by the hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. 1:50 Police Services Mr.

Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In my constituency the biggest concern that we have is serious crime. My constituents are extremely concerned about the number of shootings, acts of violence, and they demand answers. Our police service is scram- bling to keep up with the increas e in violent crime with the same number of officers that they had years ago and with the same level of funding. To the Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security. The city of Edmonton is spending $220 million this year for police. The provincial government is providing $11 million, or only 4.9 per cent. That’s it.

Can this minister explain how this level of funding is enough to fulfill this government’s responsibility to provide safe communities? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Lindsay: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member is correct in that our funding level for municipalities remains at $16 per capita. It has increased over last year because, as we all know, the population is increasing. However, I also want to let the hon. member know that Alberta is the only jurisdiction in Canada that returns fine revenues to the municipalities. This year that number is over $99 million. Mr.

Agnihotri: To the same minister. In order to deal with the issue of quicker response times, the Edmonton Police Service has added a fifth division to Edmonton, instead of the usual four. What this means is that many beat officers, community policing officers, and street teams dedicated to fighting specific areas such as organized crime, gangs, are being disbanded to service the five districts. The EPS is being forced to make some very difficult choices. The Police Act states that the minister is responsible for ensuring adequate and effective policing in Alberta. This is not happening.

The Speaker: The hon. minister. [interjections] The hon. minister has the floor. Mr. Lindsay: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I didn’t catch a question there, but I will comment that community policing is seen by the police of the Edmonton Police Service as an excellent way to get a pulse on its community, and I support those initiatives. They’ve decided to go from four regional police stations to five, and I believe that that’s a great move. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister.

I have asked questions on behalf of my constituents before, and the answers have not been adequate. Everything is not all right in my community. Our children are not safe. It’s the responsibility of this minister to provide safe and secure communities. People should not be afraid to walk the streets, but they are. This government has underfunded the police for years, has failed to provide them with the resources they need, has failed to address the serious crime in our cities. Can the minister tell my constituents why he is not doing more to assist our police to maintain safe communities?

The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Lindsay: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, in regard to community safety it’s interesting that the majority of Albertans, including Edmontonians, feel very safe and secure in their communi- ties. That being said, there’s certainly more we can do, and there’s more that we are doing. We are taking all kinds of initiatives to ensure that policing agencies work together in a more effective and efficient manner. We will continue to do that and to ensure that our communities do remain safe. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar, followed by the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Strength of Canadian Dollar (continued) Rev. Abbott: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Earlier today in question period the leader of the third party talked about the increasing value of the Canadian dollar compared to the U.S. dollar. He seemed to allude to the fact that he thinks it’s because of Al- berta’s oil exports to the U.S. that our dollar is going up. Maybe his researchers should have told him that back in 2003 our dollar was 63 cents, and we exported just as much oil then as we do today.

At any rate, this scenario may be good for Canadians who are travelling to the U.S., but Alberta’s primary market for goods is the U.S., and a lot of our province’s revenue is based on resources sold in U.S. dollars. To the Minister of Finance: have you done any revisions to the provincial budget to take into account this increased dollar? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. We have not done any revisions to this point in time. We will however be doing revisions when the first quarter comes out.

The first quarter will be done the end of June, and we will be making those revisions. We automatically make revisions on the price of oil, the price of gas, the price of the dollar, potential interest rate changes. The whole economic picture is taken another look at four times a year, with the first quarter coming out towards the end September. So the answer is definitely yes. We will be looking at these prices, and it will change our revenue forecast. The Speaker: The hon. member. Rev. Abbott: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The opposition seems to be calling question, question, and they don’t realize that the private members on the government side also have 45 seconds to do our

preamble before we ask questions of the other side. So, yes, we do have 45 seconds. To the same minister: based on today’s rising dollar, how much will the budget have to change as the Canadian dollar continues to go up? In other words, should we be expecting program cuts, Mr. Minister? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, as I alluded to in an answer to an earlier question, for every 1 cent increase in the price of the Canadian

June 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1539 dollar, we tend to lose $123 million annualized over the year. So what this generally means is that potentially if it’s 10 cents, if it does indeed go up 10 cents as it has now, if it stays over the year, we’re looking at about $1.2 billion that could be a difference. I will remind the Assembly, though, according to what the hon. member said, at $60 U.S. a barrel and a 65-cent dollar we r eceive $92.30 Canadian. At $60 a barrel and 94-cent dollar we receive $63.82. The Speaker: The hon. member. Rev. Abbott: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will remind the opposition that Beauchesne 333 and 334 talk about keeping heckling to a minimum during question period. Anyhow, to the same minister: should Albertans expect a tax increase to make up for this shortfall? In other words, how are we going to absorb this huge impact in our budget? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks to the excellent planning that this government has done, we have $7.7 billion sitting in a sustainability fund, which is used to cushion those temporary cycles.

Whether or not this is a temporary cycle is very difficult to say, but if indeed it does stay up there, if indeed the dollar does hit par and stay at par, we will have to take that into consideration in future years. But due to the excellent, excellent planning of this and previous governments, we have $7.7 billion sitting there to ensure that these temporary cycles do not change our budgeting process. The Speaker: Did I understand the hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar correctly that he was quoting from “the good book”? Rev. Abbott: Yes. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Foster Care System Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When children are placed in foster families, it is done with the understanding that they need special attention and care. Without careful intervention at-risk children can slip through the cracks and may experience an entire lifetime of hardship. This is why reports of a foster parent shortage in this province demand the immediate attention of this government. The number of foster parents in this province has declined consis- tently over the last five years.

In Edmonton alone last year the number declined by over 12 per cent. To the Minister of Children’s Services: how many children are waiting today for a foster family? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Tarchuk: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I can tell you – and I know that we talked about this in the last couple of weeks, going through estimates – that we will be spending a large focus of this year on campaigns looking for more foster parents. We know that if we can find more foster parents, we’ll be able to better match the needs of the children with the capabilities of parents.

The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When foster families are unavailable, children are often placed in hotels. This means that they do not have access to the special attention, care, or even sense of normalcy that they need to grow. Even more shocking, many of the approved facilities used by the Department of Children’s Services are in areas noted for crime, drug use, and prostitution. This is clearly not the best environment for at-risk children.

To the Minister of Children’s Services: do you agree that the placement of children in need of foster care in hotels is an unacceptable course of action? 2:00 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Tarchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I want to say – and I know that I’ve mentioned this to the hon. member before – talking about the number of foster parents we have in this province, that we have a ratio in Alberta of 1.9 foster children per foster home, and that is lower than most other provinces in the country.

With respect to hotel use – and I know that this has been raised as well in this House – it is a very rare occasion. It’s exceptionally uncom- mon. Within the past year it has happened a few times only in extenuating circumstances, and we do provide one-on-one supervi- sion for children by support workers when that does happen. Mrs. Mather: Small efforts like the minister’s long overdue public foster parent promotion campaign will not be effective unless the larger systemic problems are addressed. A lack of support for foster families is a major problem.

Less than one year ago this ministry shelved new workload standards for social workers, yet agency staff, youth workers, and addiction counsellors report 15 per cent vacancy rates and high turnover rates. To the Minister of Children’s Services: when will your department do something to meaningfully address the crisis in foster care in this province? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Tarchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can tell you that just last week I met with the Foster Parent Association. We had a great discussion.

They actually are very pleased about this year’s budget and the additional $7 million that we put into foster care. As well, they’re very excited to move forward on I think it’s $650,000 that we’re putting towards raising awareness and a campaign to get more foster parents. I can commit to the House that I will continue to work very closely with the foster community and our foster associa- tion. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Property Tax Increases Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last week the property owners in Calgary received their city tax bills. The large increase in our city property tax will hurt and worry constituents. The increase in property tax also pushes up the cost of housing rent and also the cost of running businesses. So my question today is to the hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Can the minister tell our constituents what the process is for the city tax increases and who is responsible for those increases? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Municipal- ities are responsible for municipal taxes, and those municipal taxes could increase or decrease depending on the services that are

Alberta Hansard June 5, 20071540 required, maybe the cost pressures on infrastructure or just related to the cost pressures for municipa lities. I want to say that some individuals may receive an increase, and some may receive a decrease due to the increased city assessment. Therefore, because of value added their costs could go down. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Well, thank you. To the same minister: given that our Premier created the housing portfolio under your wing, and follow- ing the process you just explained, what measure can you or are you taking to alleviate the property tax increase?

The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Danyluk: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This govern- ment supports municipalities directly through municipal affairs, and some of the services provided they support with the $773 million, the $600 million a year through the municipal infrastructure program, this year $400 million through the municipal sustainability initiative. We do have a commitment to municipalities, and I want to say unprecedented in Alberta history, of $1.4 billion to s upport municipalities after 2010. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Cao: Thank you.

My question is now to the Minister of Seniors and Community Supports. Any upward move in property tax no doubt increases the cost of living and maintaining households, particularly for Albertans on fixed low incomes, such as seniors and Albertans with disabilities. Hon. minister, what measure can you or are you taking to help those individuals? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The rising cost of living, property taxes, all taxes clearly become a burden for those on fixed incomes.

That’s why in 2004 the province acted to cap at those levels the rate of education property tax increases: so that seniors do not pay any more than what they paid in 2004 or, if they purchased their home at a later date, that level of education property tax. One interesting development that the city of Edmonton, actually, is working on through our Alberta seniors’ benefits program: they’re rebating a portion of their taxes, $63. That is working in conjunction with our department through the Alberta seniors’ benefits program. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung, followed by the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Lottery Retailer Practices Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday in question period the Solicitor General said that he hadn’t yet seen the results from the Western Canada Lottery Corporation’s internal lottery retailer practices audit, but he told the House that everything seemed fine. To the minister: if you haven’t seen the results from this initial review, how can you be so confident that everything is fine? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Lindsay: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have not seen anything in writing from the WCLC in regard to their initial investigation, but they did indicate that things were looking quite well in Alberta. We have done some work internally ourselves, and indications are that the winnings, as I indicated yesterday, of retail owners in our province are at an average which is acceptable. However, based on the findings of other provinces, which I indicated yesterday, WCLC has asked Ernst & Young to continue. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The results that the minister is referring to were actually from a previous three-year study and not this one that we’re talking about. Now, yesterday the minister told the House that the WCLC has decided to take a more in-depth review of Alberta’s lottery systems. The minister didn’t ask, and the WCLC did not voluntarily release the information. My question is: if all is on the up and up, according to the minister, why in fact did the WCLC commission Ernst & Young, as he just said, to investi- gate deeper at considerable cost to the taxpayers?

It would make absolute sense that he would ask to see the results first, before a step like this is taken. Mr. Lindsay: Mr. Speaker, all I can say is that to ensure that the integrity of the lottery industry in Alberta is where we want it to be, the WCLC has requested Ernst & Young to take a more in-depth look, and that’s what they’re doing. When those results are in, we will share them with Albertans. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given the risks involved and the gravity of the allegations that retailer fraud may be as costly and as damaging in this province as it is in other Canadian jurisdictions, will the minister instruct the WC LC to follow the lead of B.C., Ontario, and the Atlantic provinces and make the review findings public? He doesn’t seem to have any issue with this. Will he instruct them to put it on the website, as those jurisdictions do? Mr. Lindsay: As I indicated, Mr. Speaker, when we get the results of the study, we will be making them public. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon.

Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat. Child Care Funding Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A comprehensive child care strategy is an integral part of supporting families, promoting women’s participation in the workforce, and developing a flexible and efficient labour force. As the Minister of Children’s Services knows, the number of child care spaces in the province has dropped in the last decade despite an increasing demand for services. It’s no coincidence that this drop followe d this government’s decision to terminate the operating grants program for child care facilities.

When will the minister commit to restoring operating grants to child care centres? Ms Tarchuk: Mr. Speaker, what I can tell you is that we are very serious about ensuring that we have access to affordable and quality child care. A lot of time and effort, based on consultation with the stakeholders in the province, has been spent on implementing all kinds of initiatives that will help us reach that objective, and I’m going to continue working with those stakeholders. The Speaker: The hon. member.

June 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1541 Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ll try to get the minister’s attention on the core issue of operating grants to centres again. Many not-for-profit child care facilities allocate as much as 85 per cent of their budgets to pay for salaries, yet it is not enough. Lack of core funding for child care creates a downward pressure on staff wages and leaves hard-working child care providers subsidizing the cost of our child care system. No wonder that this very important service sector is facing problems with recruitment and retention.

To the minister: how can the minister expect to create enough new spaces to keep up with the demand when she won’t provide operating grants to help existing facilities to remain open and to retain and recruit staff? 2:10 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Tarchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, we believe in supporting the parents, and there are a number of ways in which we are doing that. We have just increased our subsidies for parents. We have just increased wage top-ups for staff.

Talking with stake- holders, we know that the number one issue that we’re talking about with child care and the only way that we can impact capacity in this province is to attract and retain staff. That’s what the bulk of our initiatives are based on. Dr. Pannu: Mr. Speaker, the minister’s current consultation process – and we referred to this several times in this House over the last couple of weeks – is merely a tinkering at the edges and doesn’t get to the core issue of child care in the province. Licensing protocols are important, but the real issue is funding.

Why won’t the minister admit that all Albertans benefit from having a high-quality child care system and establish stable operating grants to make it happen? Ms Tarchuk: Mr. Speaker, our funding has increased dramatically in the last couple of years. In fact, I think it’s doubled just over a period of a couple of years, and this year alone we’ve increased it another $16 million. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat, followed by the hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Forest Fires Mr. Mitzel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Alberta’s forest fire season blazed to life on the weekend when Albertans learned that a large wildfire had developed near Suncor Energy’s oil sands plant near Fort McMurray, destroying thousands of hectares of forest. My question is to the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development. Can the minister please update the Assembly on the status of this massive forest fire and whether it poses any danger to nearby communities or oil sands developments? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My latest information is that the wildfire has grown to about 10,000 hectares and is not yet under control. We have 120 firefighters there who are working on this. We have confidence that they will get it under control. Their job has been complicated by the hot, dry weather, but the weather is expected to change, and we expect that the cooler weather and, possibly, some rain will help us bring it under control. The good news is that no community nor any oil sands infrastructure is threatened by this fire. In fact, it’s actually moving in the other direction. Mr. Mitzel: Mr.

Speaker, my first supplemental question is also directed to the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development. Albertans are known for their generosity. In the last few weeks our province was gracious enough to lend more than 200 firefighters to Ontario and Quebec to battle blazes there. It was a gesture that I’m sure was certainly appreciated in those two provinces, but it begs the question: has that act of generosity depleted Alberta of crucial resources that could be fighting this massive fire in Fort McMurray? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I’m happy to reply to that question. The answer is no.

Our generous loan of our firefighters to Quebec and Ontario does not pose any risk to the province of Alberta. We have approximately 580 firefighters that are on call during the fire season, and we have a reserve, if you like, or a bench strength of another 2,000 that we can call upon. We did send 80 firefighters to Ontario on the May long weekend. They’ve all returned. The 120 that we sent to Quebec two weeks ago came back on Monday, and 40 of those have already been redeployed to the Fort McMurray fire. So I’d like to take this opportunity to thank all these young, hard- working Albertans for their good work.

Mr. Mitzel: Mr. Speaker, my final question is also to the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development. Albertans expect his ministry to be prepared to fight blazes like the one near Fort McMurray as well as others that can pop up at any time anywhere. Alberta is known for its drastic climate changes. Last year his ministry also helped when grasslands in southeast Alberta had major wildfires. Can he tell us what preparations his department makes to minimize the wildfire risk to all Albertans in all of Alberta and how they ensure that wildfires are responded to with maximum emer- gency?

The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m happy to report that our firefighting crews are well trained and prepared to fight fires this summer. We have a system of moving our firefighting crews and also our air tankers around the province based on the probability of wildfires in one region or another. That puts them closer to where fires are likely to break out and thus minimizes the response time. I’d like to remind Albertans that they can all assist in fighting fires by looking at our FireSmart program on the SRD website.

Also, if you spot a fire, you can call 310-FIRE to report any wildfires. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Support for Seniors (continued) Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As we all know, this is Seniors’ Week, and it’s quite appropriate that we’ve had many questions pertaining to seniors. They have contributed to the economic growth and prosperity of this province and expect that that contribution would be recognized. My question is to the Minister of Seniors and Community Supports.

How does this government expect retired seniors, most of whom are on fixed incomes, to keep up with the rising costs associated with living in Alberta? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, I too, as mentioned before, am apprecia- tive of the seniors of this provin ce for the great work that they do and the contribution they make. That is why our program design

Alberta Hansard June 5, 20071542 *See p. 1479, left col., para. 4. was more tailored to assist those in the highest of need. As we have a growing population of seniors, I think that’s going to continue to have to be the focus of where we look, those in the greatest of need, to ensure that we provide the supports for them rather than trying to see if we could do something for all of the seniors, some of whom may not require that assistance. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question would be to the Minister of Health and Wellness.

Finding affordable housing is a constant struggle that weighs heavily on seniors. The constant stress and insecurity about something as basic as home can aggravate both physical and mental illness. W ill the government commit to conducting a comprehensive assessment of the health impacts of the policies before they’re implemented? Mr. Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think that’s a very interesting concept. I’d certainly be willing to look at that concept.

I think that’s what we need to do, quite frankly, with respect to all of our policies as we move forward and look at reviewing the health status of Albertans and making sure that individuals can take responsibility for their personal health but have the necessary supports in place to be able to do that and, as we’ve talked about in this House before, looking at the continuum of care that’s n ecessary to either support a senior or any individual, for that matter, who needs assistance in their own home versus the continuum of care through to living in a long-term care facility.

Any policy that we bring forward from a health perspective needs to be examined in terms of how it impacts an individual’s ability to take care of themselves and to use the supports in the system necessary for a healthy life. The Speaker: The hon. member? Ms Pastoor: I’m finished. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora. Keystone Pipeline Project Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As we are sitting here today, the National Energy Board is reviewing a proposal to construct a pipeline between Alberta and the U.S.A. for the purpose of exporting raw bitumen. This bitumen is to be refined and upgraded in the U.S. and possibly sold back to Canada as a value- added product. Unless the Minister of Energy has some additional facts to contribute, at face value this proposition does not seem to be in the best interest of Albertans and Canadians.

My first question to the Minister of Energy: since diversifying Alberta’s economy, promoting value-added production in Alberta, and expanding Alberta’s labour opportunities are this government’s priorities, why do we consent to exporting our unrefined, raw resources? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Initially what I have to say is that this government has a plan to build a stronger Alberta. Getting the best value from our resources involves more than just upgrading or refining.

What makes the best sense for Albertans is to have the flexibility of a basket of products, a portfolio of resources, including everything from raw bitumen to synthetic crude to petrochemicals and transportation fuels. It’s important that we get the pipelines to the best markets for these products: for our bitumen, for other products that we ship out of Alberta. To be clear . . . The Speaker: I think we’ll ask the hon. member to continue. Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister.

One could then argue that Albertans are getting the dirty end of the stick, where the environmental footprint of extraction of raw resources stays in Alberta, but the U.S.A. benefits from high-skilled employment oppor tunities and the value- added of the product refined in the U.S.A. What is the minister’s comment on that? 2:20 Mr. Knight: Well, Mr. Speaker, we certainly do believe in increas- ing Alberta’s capacity to upgrade and refine, and we will see a significant increase in these activities in coming years.

But, at the same time, these operations are very carbon intense and require large amounts of resources, including electricity and water. More upgrading means more greenhouse gas. You have to look at the carbon intensity and environmental impacts of both – of both – recovery and upgrading. Mr. Speaker, my comment with respect to the member is this. You’ve got one foot in the canoe and one foot on the dock. The boat is leaving. Make up your mind. Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, it sounds like I’m doing splits, Mr. Speaker. I hope it doesn’t hurt.

To the Minister of Energy: will the minister submit the Alberta government’s position on this issue to the National Energy Board or intervene at the hearings? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Knight: Well, thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, we already have. Alberta has intervened in this process to ensure that we get all of the information available about the Keystone project and what it means to the energy industry and to Albertans. On the issues of bitumen export and upgrading we will continue to intervene and represent the best interests of all Albertans. Thank you.

The Speaker: Hon. members, that was 82 questions and answers. The hon. President of the Treasury Board to supplement an answer to a question raised to the Premier yesterday. Contributions to Premier’s Leadership Campaign (continued) Mr. Snelgrove: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the Premier, the Premier committed to confirm that what he believed to be true was that the return of the donation had happened, and I’m happy to confirm it was returned to Beaver regional management, as the Premier had stated yesterday.* The Speaker: That allows for a supplementary question from the hon. Member for Calgary-Currie.

Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Then my supplementary question would be: seeing as how the donation was made about six months before the money was returned and the cheque was cashed in the interim, what gives with a ll that? Why not just give it back right off the bat if, as the Premier said, it was unethical?

June 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1543 Mr. Snelgrove: Mr. Speaker, I think we’ve explained the process and how large of an undertaking it is to run a leadership campaign, and as soon as the Premier was made aware of the donation, it was returned. Calendar of Special Events The Speaker: Hon. members, a number of members have already commented that this is Seniors’ Week in the province of Alberta, and as we’re in the first few days of June, I’d just draw to the attention of all members the other weeks and days this month so that nobody feels left out.

June is also ALS Awareness Month, or Lou Gehrig’s Disease Awareness Month. We’ve already heard a statement with respect to Brain Injury Awareness Month. It is also Recreation and Parks Month. It’s also National Spina Bifida and Hydrocephalus Aware- ness Month. It’s also Stroke Awareness Month. We’ve heard one statement with respect to that. May 28 to June 3 is also National Sun Awareness Week. June 1 to June 8 is Water Safety Awareness Week. June 3 was National Cancer Survivors Day. June 4 was International Day of Innocent Children Victims of Aggression. June 4 to June 10 is also Canadian Environment Week.

June 5 is World Environment Day. June 6 is Clean Air Day. June 6 to June 9 is Canadian skills competition, trades awareness week. June 8 is World Oceans Day. June 14 is World Bl ood Donor Day. June 17 is World Day to Combat Desertification and Drought. June 20 is World Refugee Day. June 21 is National Aboriginal Day. June 23 is United Nations Public Service Day. In la belle province June 24 is Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. June 26 is International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking. June 26 is International Day in Support of Victims of Torture.

June 27 is Multicultural Day. head: Orders of the Day head: Committee of Supply [Mr. Shariff in the chair] The Deputy Chair: Hon. members, we shall call the committee to order. head: Main Estimates 2007-08 The Deputy Chair: The committee has before it three departments today: Infrastructure and Transportation; Employment, Immigration and Industry; and Seniors and Community Supports. Today is also the New Democratic caucus day. What we shall do is we’ll begin now.

The first hour we’ll allocate to Infrastructure and Transporta- tion, the second hour to Employment, Immigration and Industry, and the third hour to Seniors and Community Supports. Hon. members of the ND caucus, you will have to indicate to me whether you prefer to use the 10-minute time slots. Is that what you’d prefer? Okay. We’ll use the 10-minute time slots and go back and forth between your caucus members and the minister.

I also want to welcome the support staff that are here with the minister and advise them that should they need a glass of water or a cup of coffee, just raise your hand, and one of the pages will come by and get that for you. Infrastructure and Transportation The Deputy Chair: We’ll begin with the minister introducing members of his staff and giving his opening remarks. Mr. Ouellette: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I’m pleased to appear before the Committee of Supply once again to represent Infrastructure and Transportation.

I would like to start by introducing the members of my depart- ment’s executive committee and some other officials that are accompanying us today. To my left here is my deputy minister, Jay Ramotar. To my immediate right is Winnie Yiu-Young, senior financial officer, and Mr. Rob Penny, assistant deputy minister of policy and corporate services.

Up in the balcony we have Shaun Hammond, assistant deputy minister, transportation safety services; Bob Smith, assistant deputy minister of the properties division; Barry Day, assistant deputy minister, capital projects; Angela Paterson, director of financial planning; Patti Van Mechelen, budget analyst; my executive assistant, Warren Chandler; and my communi- cations director, Jerry Bellikka. We did find a booster seat for him today so that we could all see him. Quite simply, roads and infrastructu re play a critical role in the success of our province and in Albertans’ quality of life.

To be sure, the ability to move people and goods safely and efficiently is vital to our prosperity. However, the fact is that Alberta’s population has increased by more than half a million people over the last five years. During that period at least 300,000 more cars and trucks have been added to our highways and roads, and this has clearly taken a toll. There has never been a greater need in our province for well- designed, efficient, and safe highways, bridges, and infrastructure. As Alberta continues to grow, my department is helping to address the challenges associated with this growth.

The construction and maintenance of roads is directly related to our government’s priorities of managing growth pressures and providing safe commu- nities. The Alberta government is making a huge commitment through the capital plan with a three-year target of more than $18 billion. This level of investment has never been seen before in our province. In fact, on a per capita basis it’s the highest in the country. 2:30 The estimates I am presenting today are clearly tied with the capital plan.

For the ’07-08 fiscal year the ministry’s estimates to be voted will be approximately $3.2 billion for expense and equipment inventory purchases, nearly a 16 per cent increase from ’06-07 forecast. Of the $3.2 billion, $372 million is for noncash items such as amortization, nominal sum disposals, and consumption of inventories. When the noncash is excluded, the ministry has a $2.8 billion spending target for programs. Four hundred and twenty one million dollars are primarily for highway rehabilitation and mainte- nance.

Approximately $297 million will go towards provincial highway maintenance and systems and $124 million to highway rehabilitation. More than $1 million will go towards the Transportation Safety Board. Almost $41 million will go into transportation safety services to fund things like vehicle and driver safety programs, monitoring of the commercial carrier industry, and safety initiatives, including implementation of the new traffic safety plan, which is one of my department’s key mandates. The traffic safety plan is aimed at reducing the number of people killed or injured on our roads.

In 2005 a total of 466 people died in traffic collisions in Alberta. That same year there were more than 124,000 collisions. These are disturbing statistics, and we are working to change driver attitudes and save lives. Part of our plan involves key initiatives to help prevent co llisions such as building safer roads, enhancing enforcement of traffic laws, and educating Albertans about traffic safety. A key element of the ministry’s program expense is capital support to municipal infrastructure. More than $1.2 billion in grants will be provided to Alberta municipalities in ’07-08. These grants

Alberta Hansard June 5, 20071544 help municipalities fund their priority infrastructure projects. In most cases the decisions are local. Using this money local govern- ments can direct funding at projects, including roads, bridges, public transit, water and waste water, and emergency services.

Over the next three years the ministry will provide $422 million for the Water for Life strategy, of which $103 million is specifically for the regional municipality of Wood Buffalo; $159.3 million was approved in ’07-08, of which $35 million is for the regional municipality of Wood Buffalo; $174 million was approved for ’08- 09, $34 million of that was for the regional municipality of Wood Buffalo; $88.3 million approved for ’09-10, $34 million of that for the regional municipality of Wood Buffalo. Also included in the ministry’s voted expenses category is $360 million for government operations.

This funding enables the ministry to maintain the day-to-day operations and maintenance of government-owned properties as well as leases, the Swan Hills Treatment Centre, and capital and accommodation projects. Funding for natural gas rebates in ’07-08 is budgeted at $477.3 million, a $114 million increase over the ’06-07 for ecast. This reflects the projected increase in natural gas prices. The ministry’s capital investment budget will be nearly $1.5 billion in ’07-08, an increase of $549 million over the ’06-07 forecast.

Approximately $201 million will help fund several major projects such as the Royal Alberta Museum’s renovation and expansion, the first phase of the construction of Edmonton’s new remand centre, and the Brooks crop research greenhouse. In addition, Infrastructure and Transportation will invest in provincial highway systems and the strategic economic corridors: $626 million is allocated for the strategic economic corridor investment initiative, including the Edmonton and Calgary ring roads and the north-south trade corridor.

I want to take this opportunity to clear up any possible misunder- standing about the cost of construction on the Anthony Henday Drive south-east in Edmonton. The ’05-06 provincial budget provided $83.3 million for this P3 ring road, but the Infrastructure and Transportation annual report for that period shows an expendi- ture of $118 million. The additional $34.7 million recognizes the actual amount of work completed by the end of March ’06. The $34.7 million does not represent a cost overrun as the cost of this project is fixed.

This amount will be reduced from the future budgets to stay within the project cost. To continue with program expenses: more than $385 million will be used for provincial highway systems. This includes constructing and enhancing provincial highways and bridges so we can continue to meet the transportation needs of Albertans and others who drive through our province. Infrastructure and Transportation plays a key role in managing Alberta’s growth pressures. We are also looking ahead to what Alberta’s infrastructure needs will be many years down the road.

Through careful planning and strategic investment in key projects, we can ensure that Alberta continues to be an economic leader in Canada. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Well, thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to ask questions of the minister and would like to welcome his assistants here this afternoon.

The Alberta New Democrats, as you know, have been very concerned – and I’m sure the minister has been concerned as well – about the infrastructure of our province not keeping pace with the increase in population, the increase in our GDP, and just the overall expansion of the province. I realize that your job is very difficult, but, Mr. Chair, I’m also concerned that for every month or quarter that we delay in building certain projects, the cost of those projects with inflation and other pressures just adds to the project to the point where we have to cut back or defer projects even further.

I’m sure the minister and his department have been calculating this. So my first question would be to ask if they’ve done a cost projection back five years, to say: how much more are we paying for some of these infrastructure projects because of the inflationary pressures that we find ourselves in now? We’ve kind of painted ourselves into a corner, so to speak, with some of these projects. Certainly, I’m sure that the Infrastructure department has some going back five years to determine how much more we’re paying as a result of the inflationary pressures that we find ourselves today.

Of course, you know, while perhaps it’s a bit of a crass way to put it, there is a measure of truth when you say that you build public works projects when there might be more of a lull in the economy. This is just an historical way of dealing with things, right? You say, “Okay, the economy is pulling back a bit here,” so the government inserts capital projects to keep the economy going. It’s a good time to do it, and you might even save some money off of it as well. You know, we missed that opportunity, Mr. Chair. That’s what I’m saying.

In the past five year s, with this sort of ideological stubbornness to not pay, now we do have to pay because, of course, inevitably you do need to build roads and infrastructure and schools and everything, and we’re kind of stuck with a considerably higher bill. I would like to know what percentage more of a higher bill, in fact, have we been stuck with here in infrastructure projects in the province of Alberta. As well, further to that, I’m just thinking of what you’ve been saying to me here.

Now, we know that perhaps with the P3 project with the Calgary ring road we kind of hit a good bit of luck there, really, because, as you’ve said, these guys got stuck with a much lower contract bill, and then the inflationary pressure kicked in, and there we go. I just want my second question to be to ensure what sort of long-term contract we have with the maintenance of that Calgary ring road.

Does it have provisions in place for the company or companies to add costs into the maintenance of the Calgary ring road so that they can defer their costs? 2:40 After all, they’re going to have to make a dollar from the whole thing. They’re not just going to ta ke the loss. If they do take the loss, is there a provision to ensure that, you know, the contract isn’t left out to dry somehow? If they really did take a loss in the tendering of this contract, then are we not at risk of the providers to perhaps pull out? They would say: “Well, this is just too much.

We can’t take a bath like this.” So that’s another question that I have. Certainly, as New Democrats, we want to make sure that every- thing is transparent in regard to the public/private partnerships that the government might enter into. So we were just wondering, as another question, if we could make it as a matter of course that a public comparator is always done with these major projects and as a matter of course that that is always disclosed so we don’t have to have that difficulty. Of course, we knew you had it. You gave it to us, and that’s great.

But if we could build that into this in a systemic way so that we can always know straightaway and we’ll say: “Here we go. Here’s the piece. Here’s the P3 contract. Here’s the public service comparator, and that’s how the choice was made,” we would appreciate that very much, and I’m sure the public would as well. This isn’t my department as such, but I found it intriguing that as part of Infrastructure you have the natural gas rebate as a line item in your department. You deal with a lot of money it seems, and I

June 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1545 can appreciate that as well. Certainly, with the natural gas rebates you must build that into your budget, and you must also have a projection for where the natural gas prices are going to go over the next twelve months. So I’d like to ask if you could give us that information of how you are budgeting for the rebates and where you think that natural gas price is going to go here in the next fiscal year. Of course, Albertans have come to really count on those rebates. When the rebates kick in, it becomes a media story. Right? “The rebates are in today” sort of thing.

You know, it has become part of our energy-consumption culture in the province, so I’d like to know how much you are projecting to spend on that next year. I think that would be quite revealing. Just as a final note for our first round here, I know that there was a great folderol with the municipal funding for Calgary, and straightaway the mayor of Calgary came back and said: well, because of the perceived shortfall, we’re going to cut our LRT projects.

You know, I found it very disconcerting how flippantly and how quickly the mayor just said, “Well, that’s the first thing to go” as if that is less of a priority than something else. Of course, with the change in the way we have to use energy in this province and the way the cities are both growing – Edmonton and Calgary and others as well – I’m very concerned about the expansion of the LRT. We have an expansion project now here in Edmonton.

I want to make sure that there is a guaranteed commitment from Infrastructure and from this government that we’re going to continue to expand lines in Calgary, to build the we st line in Calgary, and we’re not going to let the vagaries of some political squabbling get in the way of building an expanded LRT. I would like to ask as well if the ministry is indeed committed to the expansion of the east/west line of the LRT here in Edmonton, again an absolutely essential project considering how fast we’re building now.

You must build your train lines at the same time as the buildings of your city are being built, as the real estate is being committed so that you can commit to nodes of where the railway stations are and rebuild, sort of, the model of your city, quite frankly, around the train lines that you decide to plan on. That’s a commitment to an east/west line in Edmonton and a commitment to the original funding to the Calgary west LRT line as well. I would like to know just to what extent the government is planning for that in a long-term way within the Infrastructure budget.

Finally, the last comment I would like to make, something that makes me sound like a municipal politician, is that the state of the roads in municipalities is quite a big deal. I know that everyone here drives on Edmonton roads at least a little bit, and you know that if you get past the point of rehabilitation and a road is not maintained properly, it really has to get redone.

I know that this budget talks about kilometres of highway to be rehabilitated, but I’m just asking about capital commitment to the urban road systems, if Infrastruc- ture has built into their budget some projections on how much the municipalities need to not just rehabilitate but expand their road systems to make the grade. I know that this is a municipal issue, but then a good portion of road development is funded through Infra- structure through the municipalities. Certainly, Edmontonians are very concerned about roads crum- bling around them.

You know, it creates practical problems but also sort of an irony on a higher level because the ec onomy has never been functioning at a higher level than it is today. This is a boom of unprecedented proportions. But then the population looks out at certain infrastructure things a nd says: well, this has never been worse. So the contrast, I think, creates a problem in a higher sense. People say: if this is the best of times, why have these things never been worse? Municipal roads in the city of Edmonton and to a lesser extent in other municipalities would fit into that category. Thanks. Mr.

Ouellette: Well, thank you very much, hon. member, for all of the great questions you’re coming up with. I do have to admit that we do have an awfully hard time trying to keep up with the growth that we have in this province. I don’t think any body could have predicted as huge a growth as we’ve been having here and how strong our economy has been, and with all of that come all the challenges of the inflation problems that you’ve been speaking about and what those costs are going to be. But let me tell you that we’re going to do the very, very best we can to try to catch up in our backlog.

It’s not just costs we’re going to have a problem with there, hon. member. We’re also going to have a problem with capacity, I’m sure. There will be times that we will actually have the money and could probably do more roads and probably won’t have the capacity. You were talking about: how much more is it really going to cost? Did we go back five years? I think probably the department did. They’ve got some figures they’ve passed on to me. But I like to believe that we’re a department moving ahead, not looking back. We want to move ahead, and we want to get things done.

I will tell you that over the next five years there are some large increases coming. In the year ’07-08 our prices went up: for buildings, 18 per cent is what we believe we’re going to pay more for this year; highways, 25 per cent. In ’08-09, both of them, another 15 per cent increase. In ’09-10, 10 per cent on buildings; 7 per cent on high- ways. In ’10-11, 10 per cent on buildings; 7 per cent on highways. In ’11-12, 7 per cent on buildings; 5 per cent on highways. Because my people beside me are so efficient, I’ll give you a little backwards stuff also.

I want them to be much more efficient moving ahead, of course. When we move back from ’07-08 to ’06-07, there was a 20 per cent increase there. If we move back another year, there was 15 per cent. From the ’04-05 it only went back 5 per cent, and the ’03-04 only went back 5 per cent. So now I’ve given you a 10-year span. 2:50 You were also talking about what we do on our ring roads when we go about doing the comparator. We will actually do that on every single job that we even consider as a P3.

We will never, ever build a P3 in Alberta without doing the due diligence, doing the cost comparator, and making sure that it’s a good deal for Alberta taxpayers. You were also asking about: can they increase us anywhere along over that 30 years? There is a clause in the contract tied strictly to maintenance and inflation rate, so it can’t be a made-up number or anything else. When we have those inflations going up, they can increase a little bit tied to the inflation rate. Basically, what we say we have is a 30-year warranty because they have to pay all of the major rehab.

Most roads in Alberta are constructed with about a 17- year lifespan expectancy to them. That’s what they’re engineered for. This is a 30-year program, so they may end up having to rehab that road at least twice – once for sure, possibly twice – before we get it back. That’s where, actually, a lot of that saving comes into play and why we talk so highly of P3 situations. We have full intentions of carrying on with ring roads in Edmon- ton and Calgary until they’re completely done as you were asking earlier. We’re going to go into the process here right away for some of the other legs that are left to do.

We’ll get a conventional market comparator done, and we’ll also look at it the P3 way. As you know, it’s like anything else. On the last one in Calgary what was so good,

Alberta Hansard June 5, 20071546 if you looked at what I tabled yesterday, is that the amount of money between those bids, how much money there was left on the table from the low to the high. That shows how competitive it is. That also is a reason why we have to be very, very careful on what information we give out as far as how the comparator was done and everything because it actually will take away our competitive edge if all of the contractors know how each other priced that contract. It actually would take away some competitive edge.

We want you to know what all the figures were as long as it’s not releasing their private information and what they used, so their competitors don’t know how they go about doing their tender. That’s pretty important to us, and it’s really important to them because they come to us and say: don’t tell these other guys how we’ve done this. They’re not talking about our opposition; they’re talking about their opposition within the marketplace. You were talking about whether or not we would make sure that the LRTs were done.

It’s really not any of our type of business, but I’ll tell you how I believe it should be looked at. We probably give more grants out on a per capita basis to municipalities than any other jurisdiction in Canada. We have a lot of grant money, whether it’s AMIP or CAMRIF or the new deals for cities, the gas tax. As I said in my notes, there’s over $1.2 billion in grants alone that goes out to municipalities; it basically flows through out of my department. That’s not counting the new $400 million that came out this year.

Yes, there were some strings to that one, but some of these others: there aren’t a lot of strings there. They can use that money for their infrastructure anywhere they want. It’s their choice on what their priority is, whether it’s an LRT line or an interchange or any of those different infrastructure things they need to build. We’re here to try to help them as much as we can, but there are all of those grants in place for them to use that money to do that job with. You also talked about the gas rebates. Really, the gas rebates: we’re just a deliverer of the program.

The Minister of Energy puts the price in on the estimate of what he feels the prices are going to be at the time, and then that’s how much money comes to us. I do know, though, that they felt that our gas prices were going to be high this year and drop in the following two years. It’s the estimate that they gave us. In ’07-08 natural gas prices are projected to increase by 80 cents to $6.75; the following two years prices are expected to decline, falling to $6.25 by ’09-10. I think that I’ve covered all your questions. I think I got all four or five that you’d asked in there.

I’m just trying to read the notes that I got down. Did I get them all? Mr. Eggen: Yeah. Pretty good job. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly- Clareview. Hon. minister, if there are any questions that you may have missed, you can submit the answers in writing. Mr. Ouellette: I’d just as soon get it over with now. I have lots of work to do later without finding answers. Mr. Martin: We want to give you some writing lessons. Maybe we can do that, Mr. Chairman. There are a number of areas, of course. I want to talk again generally about what we might call the infrastructure deficit.

I don’t envy you in an overheated economy – I call it an economy on steroids – trying to keep up. The impact is dramatic in infrastruc- ture; it’s dramatic in housing; it’s dramatic in health care, education; you name it. But we have to deal with it. That’s a reality. If we’re not going to put the foot on the brake a little bit up in Fort McMurray, then we have to deal with it, and it’s not cheap. There’s absolutely no doubt about that. I notice some of the figures just in highways that I read, and maybe the minister can comment if these are correct.

The figures that I’ve seen are that by year’s end 17 per cent of Alberta’s 30,860- kilometre highway network, more than 5,000 kilometres, are in serious shape and need to be fixed. You know, the potholes. We talk about Edmonton. That seems to be a big issue, but I’m talking generally around the province. I’m told that by 2009-2010 that is projected to hit 21 per cent. So even just in roads, and that’s only a small part of the minister’s department. I don’t know how we keep up with that, frankly. I think we’re going to have to look at what we’re doing.

I guess the question flowing from that is that the department must have sort of a short-term and long-term estimate about what I would call the cumulative deficit across the province whether it be roads, whether it be bridges, whether it be schools, or whatever. In other words, how serious is this problem, and could they give us that sort of figure? People bandy around figures. I’m not sure. I’ve heard $20 billion. I don’t know, but the department’s best estimates and how they see them beginning to deal with this.

I know that we start in this budget with more money, and the minister has alluded to that, but when we’re playing catch-up, it’s very difficult. So I think it’s important for us in the Legislature here, I think it’s important for the people of Alberta to know exactly what sort of problem we have here. As I say, the cumulative deficit and then what the department sees. I don’t know if it’s five years, 10 years, or how we’re going to deal with this because you can never catch up because as the minister well knows, the longer you wait, the bigger the bill becomes down the way, right?

So if we don’t fix it today, and we wait until next year – I know that’s true with schools – then next year it’s even more expensive. It becomes very difficult to try to deal with this. We’re trying to get a handle on just how serious the problem is and what the department wants to look at in terms of how they’re going to deal with it. 3:00 That ties into another thing that I’d like the minister’s comments on. It’s fairly new. We’ve been talking about the rising Canadian dollar. We now know that it’s 94 cents. I think the Treasurer has been alluding to this.

That means that our revenues would be down about $984 million. When I look at that, that’s equal to all the capital dollars dedicated to schools over the next two years. Nothing we’ve done, but the dollar has changed. A lot of people are speculating that we’ll have parity with the U.S. dollar by the end of the year. Who knows? But there is that speculation. If that were the case, we would lose from revenues here $1.7 billion. When I look at that, that would be like losing every dollar budgeted for infrastruc- ture support province-wide. So not only are we playing catch-up, we may be playing with our dollar.

I wonder if the department has had some discussion about this new reality of the rising Canadian dollar and what that may mean in terms of our projections down the way. If we start to lose something like $1.7 billion, that surely is going to have an impact. Now, I think that would be tying in to the royalty rates that we’ve talked about and that there should be an increase there, but that’s not in this minister’s department.

Before we talk a little more about P3s – I know that they’re the minister’s favourite topic, and the minister alluded to it – I want to ask about just the transportation part of his portfolio. I think we all drive highway 2. If I can say, often I try – and I know it’s not right – to go 10 miles over the speed limit, but I almost feel when I’m

June 5, 2007 Alberta Hansard 1547 doing that, that everybody is passing me. I know that this has to do with the Solicitor General, but I don’t know how you deal with that problem either. I’m not expecting a magic wand here, but that is a very dangerous highway. Of course, the other highway that I specifically want to talk about is highway 63. There have been a lot of complaints about that road. I know that we’re working on twinning it. It seems to shift when we’re going to have that road completed.

Can you give me just an update for when we’ll see that finally done, including I think it’s highway 28, where the connection is? Because that’s also a very dangerous road. The other question. There’ll be some other things that we can get into, but I want to talk a little bit about the school situation, having, Mr. Chairman, formerly been a trustee. At the time when I was there, it was Infrastructure that was solely responsible for school maintenance and building new schools. Now it’s my understanding that it’s both. I’m a little confused.

I asked some of the board people that I know, too, and nobody seems to know who calls the shots here. I’d really like an explanation of how that works with schools, with Infrastructure and the Department of Education and who makes a decision and how it comes about in that reality. I just want to come back to the overall Infrastructure budget and say to the minister that if we’re going to move ahead in the next little while – he has three-year projections, and I’ve asked for what the total deficit is.

But in the next one to two to three years we’ve got all these things occurring: the rising dollar, more projects coming up, overheated economy. The longer we wait, the more expensive. I’ve asked for 10 years, you know, how we deal with it. What does he see over the next one to two to three years, and how can we begin to dent some of this problem? It becomes a fairly serious matter. We’ve got people coming in, the quality of life that people talk about, wanting to live here in Alberta. If our roads are falling apart, that’s the first thing that people notice. That’s what they complain about.

I remember being in B.C. once during an election campaign, and he said: you know, it doesn’t matter what you do in a rural area; all you have to do is promise them that you’ll blacktop everything, and you’ll be popular. So roads are very much things that people look at very quickly, but I know that there are all sorts of other areas. I’m saying that it’s not an easy job. I don’t envy the minister in trying to deal with this, and of course you have to deal with the Treasury Board and the rest of it, but it is a key department if we’re going to deal with the problems that we’re facing.

I’d just conclude there and sit down. I’ll have some more questions, perhaps about P3s, but I’d like the minister to fill me in on those issues. The Deputy Chair: The hon. minister. Mr. Ouellette: Well, thank you very much. There’s a lot of stuff you’re saying that you’re right on the money with. I might jump around a little bit to try to answer some of your stuff. I think I’d like to start out by addressing a little of when you were saying that we have this backlog, because I’ve been admitting everywhere that we are in trouble. We’ve got a deficit with our roads.

One of the main reasons is that we’ve only been actually doing 350 to 400 kilometres a year of highway rehabilitation. With the amount of highways we have and the way they’ve been deterio- rating, we should be doing about 1,500 kilometres a year. We are working on a four-year plan. We basically have what we’re considering as a four-year plan to get us caught up. We haven’t got the money committed to us in the budget yet, although in this year’s three-year plan we have enough money in that budget to do about 2,500 kilometres of highway rehabilitation over the next three years.

Again I want to stress that we have a little bit of two types of problems there. One is that we’re not fully funded to get to where we need to be to completely stop the bleeding, and we’re asking industry to ramp up their capacity to make sure that we can carry on. Even though we’re working on a four-year plan right now, and it’s not fully showing it in this year’s three-year plan, we believe we’re going to get there. I’ll tell you how bad it really is.

As of March 31, ’07, total deferred maintenance across government was $5.8 billion, and the figure is going to continue to increase as funding for preservation has not been sufficient to cover ongoing maintenance requirements and escalation in wages and materials. Ongoing maintenance is currently underfunded by approximately $500 million a year plus escalation. The backlog of deferred maintenance is expected to exceed $12 billion by 2012. We’re working on that. That’s what our estimates are today. That’s why I’m telling you that we have a four-year plan, to try and bring that down.

Out of that $5.8 billion, about $1.8 billion is highways and the other is vertical. You were talking about the dollar. I mean, there’s no doubt that as a government as a whole we all have to worry about what the difference in our revenue stream is going to be and that our dollar rising is going to change our revenue stream. We have, though – I think it’s in our capital account reserve – about $6.1 billion sitting there. We have our sustainability fund. So as far as it affecting the three-year business plan that we have right now or especially our in- year plan, it wouldn’t affect that in-year plan.

What we’ve got budgeted for and have money for, if it falls short, that’s when we use the sustainability fund, for operations-type stuff, and the capital account for making sure that what we’ve budgeted for to build capital this year would go ahead. I mean, that doesn’t make the taxpayer feel better that we’re not going to have as much money coming in, but it’s good planning on the part of this PC government and our Premier to make sure that we don’t have the big ups and downs of cutbacks and all of a sudden the influxes like we used to have. We’re trying to create a good, stable rate of funding. 3:10 Highway 2.

I think we’re up to 45,000 cars a day on that highway on counts, or right in that range. That’s a lot of vehicles and a very busy highway for a four-lane highway. The speeds are unbelievable on it. I’ve been asking our department to try to figure out: is it safer to try to slow those vehicles down or let them move? I’m just going by experience now of driving that highway. I drive it at least twice a week and lots of times four.

If I happen to pick up a policeman or catch up to one or one pulls out in front of me on the four-lanes somewhere between Red Deer and Ponoka and he happens to be going all the way to Edmonton, you just watch in the mirror as the cars back up. By the time we get to Leduc, you’ve got four or five miles of traffic backed up in fully both lanes. Is it safer to let them clear, or is it safer to back them up when you hold them at the 110? Actually, most of the time the policemen are also driving 120 or 125. I have to say that I don’t know what’s best there, and we’re trying to check it.

I don’t mean this badly, but you might be listening to the media too much, who don’t always come clean with things or have the right facts to give, because by our stats and everything if highway 2 is not the safest, it’s right in that ballpark of the safest highways in Alberta to drive on as far as the billion kilometres travelled with no colli- sions or the number of collisions. Highway 2 is the safest in Alberta. I don’t know if that makes you feel better b ecause there are lots of vehicles on it.

By the stats on how they test highways for their safeness, not just us but across the country – I think the U.S. uses that same testing mechanism – that’s classed as one of the safest highways.

Alberta Hansard June 5, 20071548 Highways 63 and 28. That’s about a middle of the road one in our average. Highway 63, which really you hear about a lot in the media, saying that it’s unsafe, by our testing is a little bit safer than the average for Alberta by the traffic count and the billion kilometres travelled on it. Right now we’re doing the planning, and engineering is under way. We’re getting land acquisition. We’re doing our aboriginal consultations. In the areas where we already have that done, we’re starting to twin. I think we’ve already tendered the piece between 881 and the townsite of Fort McMurray.

That tender is given to twin that this year. Why we believe that piece is so important – now that last year we finished paving 881 all the way up there – is that at least you have two choices now. You’ve got four- lanes coming out of Fort McMurray till you reach 881. Then you can either take 881 or 63. So you have two highways you can travel on. That also will make things a little better for us with the over- weight, overheight, overwidth loads. We could actually direct traffic so they don’t have to be held up. We could actually turn them at 881 and bring them out that way or bring them up that way.

We’re also working on the new five-lane bridge that’s going to go across the river right into the town of Fort McMurray, which is very, very important. I was talking to some people up there. If there’s ever an accident on that bridge at shift change coming out of the plants, and let’s say that they’re coming into town at 7:30 at night, it might be 10, 11 o’clock at night before they get it closed, and they can’t get across the river any other way. So they’re pretty anxious to see the new five-lane bridge go in also. You were asking about how our budgets work today or whose responsibility it is on schools.

We have . . . [Mr. Ouellette’s speaking time expired] I’ll answer it next go-around. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly- Clareview. Mr. Martin: We have until approximately . . . The Deputy Chair: You have until 3:28. Mr. Martin: Okay. I’ll try to judge my remarks to give the minister time. Just a follow-up, and hopefully we’ll get time on the other. I just want to come back to the deferred maintenance to make sure that I understand what that means.

I was asking about the cumulative infrastructure deficit, and I think the minister was alluding to the deferred maintenance right now of $5.8 billion, $1.8 billion being highways, and projected to be $12 billion. Mr. Ouellette: By 2012. Mr. Martin: Yeah, by 2012. Right. What does that figure mean exactly? Is it desperate need? We’ve looked at the cumulative deficit. In that period of time is that the amount of money we’ll need, or is that sort of more the emergency of things that we have to deal with very quickly? In other words, I’m just trying to get a handle on what deferred maintenance means.

The minister said – he’ll correct me if I heard him wrong – some- thing about vertical. Mr. Ouellette: Yeah. That’s buildings. Mr. Martin: Buildings. Okay. So schools and the rest of things like that, right? We’re talking about schools and that. I’m trying to figure out what deferred maintenance means exactly. You know, I guess the only other th ing I’d say is that I think we still have to be concerned about the dollar and the amount of money. Yes, we do have the sustainability fund, and we do have the capital fund, and we can do that, but ultimately if we keep going into that, that disappears too.

I mean, that’s not just the minister’s problem. That’s a problem that the government is going to face. But if the dollar goes to, say, parity and it stays there for a number of years, even if it stays at 94 cents, I think we really have to reassess a lot of things with that dollar. That’s all I’m saying. I want to just briefly have a discussion about P3s. I know that the minister loves talking about P3s. I want to say a couple of things. I appreciate the fact that he gave me the public-sector comparator. I think the previous minister said before that it was forthcoming.

I haven’t had time to go through it because I’ve been in Calgary, but I understand that a lot of it is blacked out. I think the minister is alluding to why: because of the different bids and the rest of it. I’m not going to ask, necessarily, for the minister to go through it. I need to go through it and take a read of what you’ve handed me. But remember that the reason that we were skeptical is because Henday did come out different than what was said before the public-sector comparator, and finally we got that information. It is startling, the figures that the minister brought forward.

I’m wondering how long this company will be in business. You know, that has to be of some concern. I guess I don’t know what’s in the P3. Is it maintenance and all the things? That’s what I will sort out, and eventually we can ask the minister through a letter or whatever to deal with that. But it seems almost too good to be true. You know the old saying: if it’s too good to be true, it probably is. I just haven’t had the opportunity yet. I will do that and take a better look. 3:20 I know the government gives me the idea that the courthouse was a success as a P3.

Well, it’s a success after the fact, I suppose, because the original budget of $300 million, as the minister is well aware, went to $500 million, a 67 per cent overrun. The government said that was because of the judges, because of the security demands. Then we cut back on the project, and then it was a P3 for that private company to run it. I guess it’s all in the

interpretation. I don’t see that as a P3 raving success from where it started. I think the government perhaps learned something from that courthouse, at least hopefully. The other area, though, that I want to me