Alberta Hansard — 31 March 1980, Afternoon sitting (14:30) (Legislature 19, Session 2)

19800331

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 143 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Monday, March 31, 1980 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: PRESENTING PETITIONS MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I wish to present to the members of the Legislature a petition, signed by 1,791 Albertans, requesting the continuation of rent controls after June 30. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, before proceeding with the item with respect to Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees, I would ask unanimous leave of the House to proceed with Government Motion No. 5 standing in my name on the Order Paper today, which would have the effect of adopting the report of the special committee named pursuant to Standing Order 46. The result would be that the hon. Member for Edmonton Belmont, as chairman of the committee on the Auditor General and Ombudsman, would be able to file the Auditor General's first annual report. MR. SPEAKER: Has the hon.

Government House Lead er the unanimous leave requested? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: GOVERNMENT MOTIONS MR. CRAWFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I therefore move Government Motion No. 5, standing in my name on the Order Paper. [Motion carried] head: PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SELECT COMMITTEES MR. MACK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table in the Legis lature five copies of the Auditor General's report for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1979. head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 18 The Hospitals and Medical Care Statutes Amendment Act, 1980 MR. RUSSELL: Mr.

Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill No. 18, The Hospitals and Medical Care Statutes Amendment Act, 1980. The purpose of this Bill is to deal with the provision in two Acts relating to the remunera tion of hospital board members and removing the exist ing ceiling. [Leave granted; Bill 18 read a first time] Bill 19 The Off-highway Vehicle Amendment Act, 1980 MR. HARLE: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill No. 19, The Off-highway Vehicle Amendment Act, 1980.

The purpose of the Bill is to create conformity with existing provisions in The Motor Vehicle Administration Act in terms of seizure of off-highway vehicles, and to provide for the liability of an owner regarding certain offences and penalty sections, but precluding the impris onment of a non-operating owner. [Leave granted; Bill 19 read a first time] Bill 21 The Department of Culture Act MRS. LeMESSURlER: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill No. 21, The Department of Culture Act.

This being a money Bill, His Honour the Honourable Lieutenant-Governor, having been informed of the con tents of the Bill, recommends the same to the Assembly. The purpose of this Bill is to establish a Department of Culture and to repeal

Part 1 of The Cultural Develop ment Act and amend its name to that of The Cultural Foundations Act, to continue those cultural foundations previously established under

Part 2 of The Cultural De velopment Act. [Leave granted; Bill 21 read a first time] Bill 16 The Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Orders Act, 1980 MRS. FYFE: Mr. Speaker, I request leave to introduce Bill No. 16, The Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Orders Act, 1980. The purpose of this Act is to make changes which basically conform with changes agreed to by the uniformity commissioners of Canada in August 1979. [Leave granted; Bill 16 read a first time] MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I move that Bill No. 16, The Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Orders Act, 1980, be placed on the Order Paper under Govern ment Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce the annual report of the Hospitals and Medical Care health care insurance plan for the year ended March 31, 1979. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS MR. PAYNE: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure and privilege today to introduce to you and to my colleagues in the Assembly a large number of students from a very fine

144 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 school, St. Bonaventure junior high in the constituency of Calgary Fish Creek. There are four grade 8 classes, comprising 137 students. They are accompanied by their teachers, Messrs. Beatty, MacAulay, Dawood, and Dun- nigan, and two student teachers, Cheryl Duic and Scott Bryant. I'd like to ask them to stand in both galleries, Mr. Speaker, and receive the welcome of this House. head: MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Department of Hospitals and Medical Care MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, the costs of providing health care services to Albertans are steadily rising.

There is an ongoing growth in the volume of services provided to an expanding population, and the individual costs of those services are also growing. Since the recent agree ment with the Alberta Medical Association was reached, which increased their fee

schedule by 15.5 per cent, we have had under review the rates for health care insurance premiums. Today I want to advise hon. members of two adjust ments in the

schedule of insurance premiums: first, a modest increase in the rates; secondly, an expansion of the limits governing those citizens who are exempted from paying or whose premiums are subsidized. The premium rate for single persons will be increased by $1 monthly, moving to $8.65 per month. The premium rate for families will be increased by $2 monthly, moving to $17.30 per month. Single persons with taxable incomes under $3,000 will be exempt from premium payments, as will families with incomes below $4,000.

Additionally, partial premium assistance will be given to single persons with taxable incomes between $3,000 and $4,000, and to families with taxable incomes between $4,000 and $5,000. Senior citizens continue to be exempt from any premium payments. The changes I have announced today are to be effective July 1 of this year. Notwithstanding these nominal in creases in premiums, we anticipate that health care defi cits will continue to rise. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Rental Housing MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct the first question to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.

In the last few days, many Albertans have re ceived notices of rent increases, effective July 1, ranging up to and higher than 40 per cent. What is the depart ment doing to monitor the vacancy situation and to monitor the possibility of people on fixed and low in comes being able to meet these very sizable increases? MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the question of information relative to vacancy rates, we do not have in place a vehicle that duplicates the efforts already in the field with the Central Mortgage and Housing Corpora tion and with Alberta Housing and Public Works.

We rely on information we receive from organizations in the field as to vacancy rates. The last figures we have would indicate a vacancy rate of 8.9 per cent for the province in October; about 2.9 per cent for the city of Edmonton and, I believe, 1.9 per cent for the city of Calgary. With the movement of people into the two cities, that vacancy rate has dropped in Edmonton and Calgary. With respect to the ability to meet the various calls people have on their incomes, that is something that might be considered by the Department of Social Services and Community Health, though I'm not sure.

As I indi cated in answers to questions last year, we are not setting up a monitoring program with respect to rents, because once you have a monitoring program in place, that would indicate that something would then happen. We had indi cated in this Legislature with the passage of The Rent Decontrol Act that the controls would come off all rental accommodation on July 1 this year. The rent decontrol offices in Edmonton and Calgary, of course, receive calls, as does my office in Edmonton. We receive information with respect to rent increases and matters of that nature, but no formal mechanism is in place. MR. R.

CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the minister. Is it the intention of the government, through the minister's de partment, or does the minister know of any other de partment that plans to do the necessary monitoring to satisfy the government that with the sizable rent increases now being made public, people on low and fixed incomes will be able to meet those increases? MR. KOZIAK: Well, as I answered to a question posed in this Assembly last week, it's always been our concern, Mr.

Speaker, that those in need — and it's been a policy of this government ever since we took office in 1971, that we have attempted to meet the needs of Albertans who are on fixed incomes and who have difficulty meeting their obligations. We have always looked towards pro grams which would meet the needs of those people, par ticularly our senior citizens.

As I mentioned in answer to a question last week, the programs we have in place include the core housing incentive program, where my colleague announced an investment of over $200 million for apartment construc tion, which would see 50 per cent of the over 2,000 units under controlled rents for those with moderate income. I've also mentioned, Mr. Speaker, that well over a third of our senior citizens now reside in government- subsidized accommodation. DR. BUCK: Two-thirds don't. MR. KOZIAK: Mr.

Speaker, in terms of what's presently under construction and what's planned for construction, we have another 4,000 units. We find those who in fact live in government-subsidized accommodation are pre dominantly those who can best take advantage of the low rents. So when the hon. Member for Clover Bar suggests that two-thirds don't, that does not necessarily mean that the large number of the two-thirds who don't, need government-subsidized accommodation. We will attempt to meet the needs of those who need it. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the Minister of Housing and Public works.

Does the government have under active consideration at this time any broadening out or, I might use the term, deepening of the subsidy program under programs in the minister's department? The minister's publications refer to the sub sidies as deep, intermediate, and shallow. Is the govern ment giving active consideration at this time to broaden ing out those programs so that people on fixed and low

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 145 incomes will in fact be able to meet what are now becoming actual rent increases as of July 1? MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Speaker, as my colleague the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs referred to, we have recently announced massive programs in the family home purchase program and the core housing incentive program: $505 million for 10,000 units, which addresses in a very significant way the question of supply and affordability.

Our subsidies, I think, are exceptional ly deep: $270 a month maximum subsidy for incomes at the $12,000 level, plus an additional $20 a month for starter homes, new home ownership. So these programs are massive. My assessment of the interest shown by people in all areas, as noticed by the Alberta Home Mortgage Corporation, shows that these programs are going to be accepted in a very massive way. As indicated in the throne speech, yes, we are looking at a number of other areas in due course. Such as might be affirmed, members of the House will be so informed. MR. R. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, a further supplementary question to the minister. Is the minister in a position to indicate to the Assembly whether the government has at this time the concept of broadening out its existing subsi dy programs as far as rental assistance is concerned? It's primarily people in the rental assistance situation who we are concerned about, at least today. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Speaker, I'm sure the hon.

Leader of the Oppositon is aware — I don't think we have the time today to go through all the many programs we have, whether it be the $2,000 pioneer repair program grant or last spring, as hon. members will recall, when the renters' assistance grant was doubled from $250 to $500. I could outline many, many programs if you'd allow me the time, sir. Again, I would indicate that we are working and observing the situation. The budget comes down Wednesday. In due course, members of the House will be informed of such other measures that will be adopted. MR. R. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, then could I go back to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and ask if he's prepared to take immediate action to continue the freeze on conversion of rental units to condominiums, so that rental housing supply can be maintained? I recognize that doesn't come off until the legislation is taken off the books, but is the minister prepared to give a commitment to the House that he's prepared to work in that direction now? MR. KOZIAK: One of the difficulties we encountered with a rent control program, Mr. Speaker, was that — and we mentioned this when the legislation was first introduced.

With both the temporary anti-inflation pro gram and The Temporary Rent Regulation Measures Act, we were dealing with rough justice. Rough justice is that because it's rough. It quite often reveals basic inequi ties that are to no one's benefit. As a matter of fact, a typical example of that came to my attention early in the term with respect to the possible conversion of some rental accommodation to condomin ium ownership in the city of Calgary. In that particular case, Mr.

Speaker, the development was admirably suited to condominium ownership, and the majority of tenants had indicated they would in fact like to purchase the unit in which they resided. However, the Act prevented the conversion. There we have an example in which the legis lation worked to the detriment of those it was intended to assist. That's one situation we have. My feeling is — and I would presume that feeling is shared by my colleagues in this Assembly — that people should be encouraged toward home ownership, whether in the traditional or the condominium sense.

That, of course, is recognizable in the fact that with the Alberta family home purchase program, condominiums . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. With great respect to the minister, it would appear that he is engaging in debate as to the reasons the conversions may or may not permitted. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'll pose an additional question.

Is the minister prepared to give serious consid eration to the proposition that the freeze continue on conversion of rental units to condominiums, at least until such time as steps are taken to help, if I might use the term, iron out the market situation so that the market place can once again assume its normal responsibility? MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, we're always prepared to consider matters. However, I don't think the hon. mem ber's suggestion will add to a solution to the long-term housing needs that we as a government see have to be supplied for Albertans over the next decade. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. What special consideration will the government make with respect to high-growth areas in the province? I mention specifically the city of Grande Prairie, but other communities could be cited as well, where there is a virtual no-vacancy rate. Will there be any flexibility in the decontrol program? For example, would the government consider extending rent controls in areas where there is a virtual no-vacancy rate situation? MR. KOZIAK: Mr.

Speaker, the difficulty with the hon. member's suggestion is that it neglects the history of the reason for our being in controls. The reason for our being in controls is part of an anti-inflation program which has since expired. The hon. member's suggestion that a rent control program be in place in high-growth areas is a solution that ultimately creates a greater problem than the one the hon. member seeks to address. We're Finding that the activity taking place in the city of Grande Prairie is encouraging construction of rental accommodation. Rent controls may, in fact, do the opposite.

That would not be useful for the provision of accommodation for the many people who are going to be seeking homes in the Grande Prairie area in order to provide the needed exper tise in the resource development that is taking place very strongly in that city and in the surrounding area. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. Has the government given any consideration to amendments to The Landlord and Tenant Act with respect to the 90-day notice; for ex ample, changing that from as many as four increases a year to 180 days' notice? MR. KOZIAK: Mr.

Speaker, The Landlord and Tenant Act, 1979 — and I refer specifically to that aspect of the title — was passed by this Assembly not even a year ago. At that time a number of very important and needed changes to the landlord and tenant law were introduced and passed by this Legislature. Before we embark upon a

146 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 series of amendments to that, I think we should have a better feel for the application of that Act. I don't have that feel today. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary ques tion is to the hon. Minister of Social Services and Community Health. Could the minister advise the As sembly what contingency programs his department has in place in light of the answer of the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs that there may have to be increases in social benefits?

My question relates not to those people who are on social allowance per se, but to those people who are under other programs. Will there be a guarantee that the department will in fact move in, so that people are not deprived of their residences in the present tight situation? MR. BOGLE: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member is refer ring to those Albertans over the age of 65, then of course we do have a program of assisting and assuring a minimum income, which is really a supplement to the old-age security and Canada Pension Plan benefits.

On the other hand, I'm not sure if the hon. member is referring to those Albertans between the ages of 60 and 65, because there is a program for those individuals as well. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, my question really relates to those people now receiving the assured income and whether or not the government would be prepared to make adjustments in the assured income program to take rising rents into account. Those people who are on social allowance would presumably have that looked after as a result of their discussions with their case worker. I'm talking about people who come under the assured income program. MR.

BOGLE: Mr. Speaker, as I'm sure the hon. member is aware, the assured income program is for Albertans over the age of 65, some of whom are renters and some of whom live in their own homes. The question of the amount of support provided is an ongoing discussion with various senior citizens' organizations. To get into that matter today might be prejudging the budget and other such discussions we'll have in this Assembly. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could perhaps supplement that answer by assuring the House that the government's concern with regard to this situa tion is very extensive.

As the Speech from the Throne noted, a number of other new initiatives in housing will be announced by my government during the course of the session. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, a short supplementary ques tion to the Minister of Social Services and Community Health. It has to do with people who are on the assured income program. Can the minister indicate what monitor ing his department has been doing as to what rental accommodation is available for senior citizens on fixed income? MR. BOGLE: Mr. Speaker, the department doesn't mon itor housing in a direct way.

We rely on advice given us by the Senior Citizens' Advisory Council and the Council on Aging, as well as our sister government departments, primarily Housing and Public Works. MRS. CHICHAK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my supplementary to the Minister of Housing and Public Works. Some 2,000 citizens are coming to this province every month.

Has the minister made or is he preparing any representations to his federal counterpart for a rein statement of the capital cost allowance or to come through with some other incentive to assist this province as other provinces are being assisted with respect to addi tional housing, in order that we could help our citizens cope with these problems? MR. CHAMBERS: As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I recently wrote to my federal counterpart, the Minister responsible for housing and public works, and have not yet received a reply.

I have received correspondence submitted by other ministers in other provinces, though, and there would certainly appear to be a movement toward having a federal/provincial housing meeting, within the next couple of months I would presume. I pointed out the seriousness of the capital cost allowance removal and, of course, the high interest rate situation. MR. KNAAK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.

I'm wond ering if the minister or his department has conducted what might be called an economic survey, to determine to what extent the present high increases in rent are caused by the high interest rates or to what extent the high increases are caused by shortages of rental accommoda tions on the market. MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, in these discussions we should remember first of all that what we're talking about, in terms of the elimination of rent controls in this province, is that in excess of three-quarters of all tenants today live in accommodation that is not under control.

What we are talking about in terms of July 1 is about one-quarter of the tenants in the province. It may well be that interest rates on the accommodation being rented under controlled circumstances will be increasing. I don't have exact information on that particular point, Mr. Speaker. But that would be a general concern not only in the provision of rental accommodation but in many as pects of our society and economic life. MR. KNAAK: Mr.

Speaker, in light of the answer, I'm wondering if the Minister of Housing and Public Works could indicate whether his department has made a study to determine if it was the increased interest rates or shortages that caused the increase in rents. The reason I ask the question is you have to know that before you devise policies to solve the problem. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr.

Speaker, there's no question but that the combination of the removal of the capital cost allowance and the very high interest rate situation today, which is obviously a policy of the current federal gov ernment, are very serious and are creating difficulties in the housing market. Land Purchase — Cold Lake MR. R. CLARK: I'd like to direct the second question, which concerns the sale of some land at Cold Lake to a company principally owned by Esso Resources, to the Associate Minister of Public Lands and Wildlife. On March 7, the minister said he did not know who "the

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 147 principals" were. Four days later, the minister announced that Esso Resources was the principal purchaser. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Is the hon. leader em barking on a series of questions relating to statements made to the media by the hon. minister? MR. R. CLARK: No, Mr. Speaker, I'm just background ing the minister. My question to the minister is: when did he first learn that it was Esso Resources that was acquir ing the land at Cold Lake? Why was the exemption made through the foreign land ownership regulations? MR. MILLER: Mr.

Speaker, as soon as the information was received regarding the order in council, I knew that Esso Resources was the principal that would be receiving the land under the foreign ownership regulations. I should add that they had requested confidentiality, that there was a numbered company, the principals of which I did not know, that was acting on behalf of Esso Re sources. The land was approved under the regulations because it was to be used for housing development for their employees.

I think the Legislature should recognize the fact that with the massive development that was and is proposed for Cold Lake, the need for housing for the employees was definitely there. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. Before the hon. minister made the recommendation to the cabinet that that regulation be waived in favor of this application, were discussions held with the Alberta Housing Corporation? Why wasn't the Alberta Housing Corporation used as the land banking agency? MR. MILLER: Mr.

Speaker, we've always been of the opinion that when development is to take place and there is need for housing, the best mix is to have government, municipal, and private industry involvement. It should be recognized that many private companies as well as the provincial government and the municipalities have banked land in the Cold Lake area. MR. R. CLARK: A supplementary question to the minis ter.

Can the minister indicate to the Assembly what reason persuaded the government to approve this exemp tion from the foreign land regulations, as opposed to the town of Cold Lake having an opportunity to acquire that land? As the minister knows, the town of Cold Lake has tried to annex land to the town. What was the persuasive argument Esso Resources was able to use to convince the government to say yes to Esso Resources and no to the town of Cold Lake? MR. MILLER: Mr. Speaker, we didn't say no to the town of Cold Lake. MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. minister.

When the government let this exemption go through, it did say no to the town of Cold Lake, because Cold Lake wasn't and still hasn't been able to acquire the land. It's got LAB hearings going right now. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Fish Creek, followed by the hon. Member for Bow . . . MR. R. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. minister then. Will the minister at least assure the Assembly that they'll move ahead quickly with the LAB hearings as far as Cold Lake-Grand Centre are concerned now, in light of the minister's announcement today that the plant is going to go ahead. MR. MOORE: Mr.

Speaker, on a point of order. The hon. Leader of the Opposition is making some kind of accusation that the Local Authorities Board or this gov ernment has prevented an applicant from expanding the boundaries of the town of Cold Lake. The ownership of land has little or nothing to do with annexation hearings in this particular case. MR. R. CLARK: Baloney. MR. MOORE: If the leader has some accusations to make with respect to the Local Authorities Board or this government's handling of annexation, let him make them in detail and not simply throw accusations across the floor. DR.

BUCK: He said you're not moving, Marvin. MR. R. CLARK: I can appreciate you're very sensitive. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. NOTLEY: Could I ask a supplementary question to the hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs? I believe he is the minister generally in charge of co-ordination in the Cold Lake area. Could the minister advise the Assembly when Imperial Oil brought their decision to proceed with a land banking scheme of its own to the attention of the Alberta government?

I ask the question in view of the fact that Imperial Oil indicated during the hearings that it did not want to get into the land banking business. When was this matter brought to the government's attention, and what were the reasons that Imperial Oil decided to change its previously announced position? MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I have no knowledge of that. The Minister of Housing and Public Works might have. MR. NOTLEY: I'd like to direct that question, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of Housing and Public Works. MR. CHAMBERS: Mr.

Speaker, obviously the question should be directed toward the private purchaser of the land. Personally, I am very happy to see private industry involved. As a free enterpriser, I think it's important that people who wish to be involved in areas take a sense of responsibility with regard to land acquisition. I don't think it should necessarily be the role of government to MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Fish Creek, followed by the hon. Member for Bow Valley. Investor-owned Utilities MR. PAYNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question this afternoon is directed to the hon.

Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. The federal government has recently announced its intention to reduce the federal income tax rebate program for investor-owned utilities to 50 per cent. Could the hon. minister advise the House

148 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 today if any representations have been made to the feder al government or indeed are contemplated, in view of the impact this highly selective and discriminatory tax will have on the electric utility bills of customers of investor- owned utilities? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has certainly put the question in the right context. My col league the Minister of Utilities and Telephones and I can safely say we have made many representations to the federal government over the past two years on these particular critical issues.

The Assembly will remember that in the fall of 1978 Mr. Chretien, who was then Minister of Finance in the federal government, intro duced a similar provision. At that time we took some very strong exception to the fiscal policy of the govern ment — not just, as the member pointed out, in terms of the impact on the consumer in Alberta but, as is the case today, the lack of consultation with the provincial gov ernment and the other governments with whom the fed eral government has some agreement to work together.

I believe we have stated on several occasions that the impact of this particular movement will do very little to encourage the private sector to invest in much-needed utilities in this province. In fact if my information is correct, if this provision had been in place, through 1979 investor-owned utilities would have lost approximately $50 million. So it seems to me it's a rather strange fiscal policy for the federal government to evoke this kind of move, when at the same time we're trying to find energy self-sufficiency in other areas and the private sector needs encouragement to invest in this province.

Grain Exports MR. MANDEVILLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the hon. Minister of Economic Develop ment. Could the minister indicate the present status of the grain terminals recently purchased by the government? MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, if the member is referring to the inland terminals, they are operative and being upgraded for both their electrics and dust cleaning.

As I indicated before, the final disposition of those terminals in terms of the amount of money spent on upgrading will depend on where they fit into a total grain system, which will include facilities at the coast and the railroads as well. MR. MANDEVILLE: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is it the intent of the government to use these elevators for cleaning grain before it's sent to the coast? MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to take that question as notice. MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question.

Could the minister indicate if the 1,000 hopper cars the minister announced last fall have been ordered yet or are under construction, and when will they be in operation? MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, at the time the commit ment to buy the hopper cars was made, the capability in Canada for 1980 was full, and we didn't anticipate deli very of those cars until 1981. I believe they're out to tender now. MR. SINDLINGER: Mr. Speaker, could the minister advise the House whether the inland terminals will have the capability of measuring protein content? MR. PLANCHE: Mr.

Speaker, shipping grain from Canada, to export by protein content versus grade, is an ongoing discussion. I don't think it's been resolved, but perhaps the Minister of Agriculture would like to sup plement that answer. MR. SCHMIDT: Mr. Speaker, concern has been shown by purchasers in Southeast Asia of tying grain that would be available to them not only by grade but indeed by protein content. If that is the nature of marketing, cer tainly we would have that capability of providing a pro tein content over and above the grade itself, if that is the wish of the purchaser. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, to the Minister of Economic Development. With the question of the usage of the hopper cars we will be getting, can the minister indicate if there have been negotiations with the western provinces? Will these hopper cars go into a pool or be used just for Alberta farmers? MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, the deployment of those cars hasn't been established yet. The decision as to whether they will be used for both board and non-board grain isn't established. We would see these cars being used primarily for a full grain system for Alberta product, and what's left over would go into a pool.

But it hasn't been firmly established. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. I asked, have there been discussions with the other prairie provinces? It seems rather difficult to sort out, this is my car, that's your car, and that's his car. Has the minister had discussions as to the utilization of these cars in a pool for all the western provinces? MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, the ingenuity of the Leader of the Opposition has caused us to reflect on whether we'll paint them orange and blue, in which case they'll be easily recognizable. MR.

SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary on this point. MR. SINDLINGER: Mr. Speaker, to the minister. Al though some of the Canadian Wheat Board grain cars have been painted a distinctive color, they have been spotted running in California and Texas. I was wondering if the minister would assure this Legislature that the cars we intend to paint blue and orange remain in Canada. MR. PLANCHE: Mr. Speaker, I don't know whether I can give that assurance, because we're not going to run the railroads. We're certainly going to try to keep them in Canada. Stay of Court Proceedings MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct this ques tion to the hon. Attorney General and ask whether he recommended the stay of proceedings in the hearings brought by Mr. John Chief Moon concerning allegations of assault by the RCMP?

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 149 MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's question relates to an incident last October, in which charges were in effect laid on both sides. The advice of the law officers of the Crown who were most directly involved was that all the proceedings be stayed; that the charges against John Chief Moon be stayed, and that the charges that John Chief Moon had instituted by way of private complaint also be stayed. That was done. I might add that I had some representations from members of the legal profession, primarily in Calgary, who expressed an interest in the case.

I have since indicated that three law officers of the Crown who had not been previously in volved in that decision would do an independent review of the file and recommend a final course of action. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. Attorney General. Bearing in mind that the time period lapses, if my memory serves me correct, on Friday of this week, whereby the charges Mr. Chief Moon has brought forward could in fact be dealt with, has the minister kept that time frame in mind?

Is there any way, should — rather than putting it in a hypothetic al sense, has that been formally kept in mind, and is the government giving any consideration to possibly extend ing it? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure of the mechanics of extending that limitation period, but the existence of the limitation period has indeed been kept in mind. I do believe that the review will be done in time. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. Is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly what the precedent is for stay of private proceedings?

I understand that stay of public proceedings is a frequent course adopted by the department. But my question really relates to the rather unusual approach here of a stay of private proceedings. How many stays of this nature have in fact been undertaken by the depart ment, and is this a general policy position of the govern ment of Alberta? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't be in a position to give an answer to the part of the question that asks how many such cases there are.

I could certainly indicate that private prosecutions tend to be in cases where there is an acrimonious dispute, usually on a rela tively minor matter, as distinct from major criminal activ ity. It usually involves hard feelings between people in volved. Because of that, private prosecutions are every bit as likely, if not more likely, to be stayed than prosecu tions instituted in the first instance by representatives of the Crown. The legal position is entirely clear.

The right a person has to access to the courts in a civil sense is different when entering the criminal courts, where the sole jurisdiction to determine what charges are laid does in fact reside with the Attorney General. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. Attorney General. Because the allegation here was not with respect to a minor matter but, rather, a serious allegation, is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly what the special and compelling circum stances were that led the government to conclude that there should be a stay of both the proceedings against Mr.

Chief Moon and his proceedings against the RCMP? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I think I indicated that most cases of private prosecutions tend not to be in the major criminal sense. I do not suggest that an allega tion of an assault is not an important matter, but in the criminal court sense it is relatively minor. Other than traffic charges and the like, it is one of the most common charges laid that our courts ever hear. They are very, very numerous and, in some cases, should not be laid.

In the type of case of which I speak, they're very often laid as a result of an acrimonious dispute between people, where the facts are difficult to ascertain and where the better part of judgment may well be that the further proceeding is so unlikely to succeed that it would be an abuse of process to lay charges. None of those remarks relates specifically to the inci dent the hon. member is asking about.

With respect to the John Chief Moon case, the feeling of the Crown counsel who advised with respect to that matter was that although there had been a scuffle, given the circumstances of the case and the fact that both sides, if I can put it that way — two RCMP constables on the one part and John Chief Moon on the other part — had been involved in a mix-up involving some blows being struck on both sides, that it was a case that probably should not, in their view of the matter at that time, be proceeded with. That is all that was involved.

It was well known that the parties had contemplated civil proceedings as well, and my information is that civil proceedings had indeed been taken. The burden of proof in similar proceedings is well known to be vastly different from that in the crimi nal courts. Whether a person may succeed in a civil action for damages based on the same facts is not the same question as whether a charge should be laid and might be maintained or sustained by a court in due course. I might conclude on that, if I might, Mr.

Speaker, by indicating that the review that has been undertaken by three members of the Attorney General's Department who had not been involved in the original decision was done that way in order to assure an independent review of the matter. That whole process was put in place in order to be as sure as can be that no error of judgment had occurred when the first decision was made. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary question to the hon. Attorney General.

In view, I am sure, of the government's concern that justice not only be done but that it appear to be done, will the Attorney General give the House an undertaking that once the review is completed by the three legal counsel who have not been involved in the case to date, the Attorney General or a representative of the Attorney General would be prepared to share this information and discuss it with Mr. Chief Moon? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I met with Mr. Chief Moon some weeks ago in respect to the matter, and we had a brief discussion at that time.

Rather than indicating to the hon. member what portion of the work done by officials might be disclosed here or to John Chief Moon, I would simply indicate that when the result of that review is known, I will certainly make that known to everyone involved and will take under consideration the question of whether or not some further discussion with Mr. Chief Moon might be useful. MR. NOTLEY: By Friday.

150 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 Sports Facilities — Calgary DR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Government Services. With respect to the statement filed by the minister on Friday, March 21, concerning major enclosed multipurpose stadium facili ties in Calgary and Edmonton, what are the ramifications as to the construction of a coliseum in Calgary? MR. McCRAE: That's a very broad question, Mr. Speaker.

The statement the member refers to is one I issued a week ago Friday, to the effect that the govern ment was not at this time about to embark on the construction of a multipurpose football, hockey-type, enclosed stadium. I don't believe I could say it had any direct ramification on the other structures. At this time we've simply closed the door on the multipurpose facility. DR. CARTER: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Has any decision been made yet regarding a Calgary coliseum in particular?

When might we expect some decision with regard to the coliseum as a possible means of supporting the bid for the 1988 Winter Olympics, or so that Cal- garians might have a chance to watch Wayne Gretzky win another scoring title? MR. McCRAE: Mr. Speaker, that question has far fewer ramifications, but it's no less difficult to handle. Could I express it this way, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the interest of the Member for Calgary Millican, in whose riding any type of facility might well be housed if and when it were to be constructed.

I am also sure the other 16 Calgary area MLAs, including me, have a similar interest in the question. As to what specifically the gov ernment has done at this point, we have not concluded any position in terms of any particular capital commit ment. Sharing the interest of the hon. member, I would hope that our government would come to grips with that question somewhat later in the spring. MR. SINDLINGER: Mr. Speaker, supplementary to the minister.

Approximately two and a half years ago the minister responsible for Calgary at that time approached various amateur athletic groups in the city and asked them to come together with a consolidated proposal for multipurpose sports facilities. Could the minister please advise the Legislature whether that group, which became known as the southern Alberta recreational development association, had any input into the study tabled in the Legislature last week? MR. McCRAE: No, Mr. Speaker. The group the hon. member is referring to has a different recommendation before the Calgary caucus, chaired by the hon.

Member for Calgary North Hill; that is, to build a rather large fieldhouse as part of our facility development down there. I should say, Mr. Speaker, that the Dickie committee, the former member of this Legislature and former Minis ter of Energy . . . DR. BUCK: Still on the pay roll. MR. McCRAE: That's a very interesting comment, be cause the hon. Dickie, as has been the pattern of so many members leaving this House to contribute voluntarily their own time in the interests of the citizenry [interjec tions] . . . Thank you very much. Mr.

Dickie is chairing a committee that is assessing the Calgary area facility needs, and will report back to the city towards the end of April, I believe. MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise on a point of privilege. MR. SINDLINGER: Mr. Speaker, supplementary to the minister. Could the minister advise the Legislature what the status of the proposals given to the government by SARDA is at this time? MR. McCRAE: No I can't, Mr. Speaker.

I'm sure that that will be put before the Dickie committee and the Calgary caucus, and that in due course we will become aware of their position and how it fits into the total Calgary or southern Alberta facility scene. MR. SINDLINGER: Mr. Speaker, inasmuch as the pro posal is made to the government and at the government's urging, is it the intention of this government to respond to SARDA? MR. McCRAE: To the best of my knowledge, Mr.

Speaker, the individual members, through the chairman of the Calgary caucus, have been responding to SARDA, as their facility request relates to the total southern Alber ta or Calgary facility need. MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, I would . . . MR. SINDLINGER: Mr. Speaker . . . MR. SPEAKER: We've run past the time for the ques tion period, but if the Assembly agrees, perhaps we might hear — as I understand it, the hon. minister wishes to supplement an answer given. MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise on a point of privilege.

To me there are certain limitations on the kinds of guffaws and silly laughter we get from the opposition benches. DR. BUCK: Is that a point of personal privilege? MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, I would have to say that MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. SCHMID: . . . the former minister who was in this House, Mr. Dickie . . . DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, what is the point of privilege he is speaking on? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Perhaps I could be al lowed to listen to what the hon. minister's point of privi lege is. I would say that it should be a matter of privilege that relates to someone who is in this Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. DR. BUCK: What is your point of personal privilege? MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, again, while the person is not in this House and therefore is not able to defend himself . . .

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 151 DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. minister is out of order. MR. SPEAKER: Possibly we could just wait to hear what the point is. MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, if any member of society in Alberta, in fact any person living in Alberta, contributes his or her time freely and in that matter to support certain programs of this government, I think it should be said that Mr. Dickie did so because his wife happens to have died of cancer . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. We've run well past the time for the question period.

If there are any further questions, possibly they could be dealt with tomorrow. Roloff Beny Collection MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could respond to a question posed by the Member for Clover Bar last week on which I said I would secure further information. At that time he asked a question as to the amount spent to date from the special warrant for $229,000 approved by Executive Council last spring with respect to the Roloff Beny initiative.

I can advise the Assembly that of the special warrant for $229,000, all but about $2,000 will effectively lapse today, March 31, 1980, which is the end of the fiscal year. The out-of-pocket disbursements have been less than $2,000. Those were the only moneys disbursed from that warrant. There will be some further disbursements for legal and related costs in the months ahead. The amounts of those are not yet known. MR. SPEAKER: Although the time has passed, the hon. Member for Calgary McKnight, in his special capacity, would like to supplement an answer previously given.

Does the Assembly wish to receive that answer now? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. Alberta Research Council MR. MUSGREAVE: Mr. Speaker, in answering a ques tion by the hon. Member for Calgary Currie on Friday about the location of the site of the Research Council, I advised the House that "many sites were chosen". I should have said that many sites were considered. Also, the answer I gave may have implied that we did not wish to be located in southern Alberta. It was the reverse situation, Mr. Speaker. I suggested that, hopeful ly, in the future we would consider having a location in the southern part of the province.

MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. Solicitor General revert to Tabling Returns and Reports? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS (reversion) MR. HARLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and members. May I table the 55th annual report of the Alberta Liquor Control Board and the 16th annual report of the Alberta Racing Commission, pursuant to statute. ORDERS OF THE DAY head: GOVERNMENT MOTIONS (continued) 3. Moved by Mr. Crawford:

Be it resolved that:

(1) Notwithstanding Standing Order 18 (1) (

b) and (c), and notwithstanding any other rules of debate, Mr. Speaker shall, on April 2, 1980, at 4:30 p.m., interrupt the proceedings and forthwith put the question on any sub-amendment or amendment under consideration to the motion for an address in reply to His Honour the Honourable Lieutenant-Governor's speech and shall immediately thereafter put every question necessary to dispose of the motion;

(2) Standing Order 5 be suspended in order that the Assembly may sit at 8 p.m. on Wednesday, April 2, 1980. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I move Motion No. 3 in my name on the Order Paper. Although I think everything in respect to the two parts of Motion No. 3 is already well known to members of the House, I might simply mention that it's because the throne speech debate would ordinarily have ended on Good Friday, and the House will not be sitting on Good Friday, that the proposal is in

part 1 of the motion. Some regret that any suggestion was ever made that the throne speech debate should or need be shortened in any way, but there was no alternative as we saw it in this case. That's why the motion has been proposed in that form. Item 2 of the same motion, Mr. Speaker, is merely to allow the budget to be presented Wednesday night. [Motion carried] 4. Moved by Mr. Crawford:

Be it resolved that when the House rises at 5:30 p.m. on April 3, 1980, it shall stand adjourned until 2:30 p.m. on April 9, 1980. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I move Motion No. 4 standing in my name on the Order Paper. [Motion carried] head: GOVERNMENT BILLS AND ORDERS (Second Reading) Bill 2 The Consumer and Corporate Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 1980 MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 2, The Consumer and Corporate Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 1980. As I indicated during first read ing, four statutes are amended by this Bill.

In the case of The Cemeteries Act and the prearranged funerals Act, the amendment basically effects a change in administration from the Alberta Securities Commission to the consumer relations division of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Mr. Speaker, although the administration of both Acts in respect to those areas where the Department of Consumer and Corporate Af fairs is involved has been admirably handled by the * *See page 128, right column, paragraph 3

152 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 Alberta Securities Commission, we find that the demands on the Securities Commission in the many areas it is responsible for, having regard to the economic growth and viability and development of this province, deem that the administration of those Acts would be handled better in conjunction with other consumer matters that fall with in the responsibilities of the consumer relations division of that department. That is put forward in the amend ments to those Acts found in Bill 2.

I should also indicate that an appeal procedure is struck for both Acts, basically along the lines we have in other Consumer and Corporate Affairs statutes, such as The Real Estate Agents' Licensing Act, to provide for a system of appeal. This is necessary because previously the appeal would have been heard, in the case of The Prear ranged Funeral Services Act, by the Securities Commis sion from a decision of the chairman and, in the case of The Cemeteries Act, by a review by that commission of its own decision.

So we have in place under the Bill an appeal procedure which should satisfy the needs of any one not satisfied with the decision of the director or whoever might handle the responsibilities under those two Acts. In the case of the amendments to The Co-operative Marketing Associations and Rural Utilities Guarantee Act, Mr. Speaker, the present Act requires the Provincial Treasurer, pursuant to

Section 10, to make an annual report to the Legislative Assembly, relative to guarantees that have been made and moneys paid out pursuant to guarantees. This same obligation is imposed by this Legis lature upon the Provincial Treasurer by

Section 76 of The Financial Administration Act, and it's unnecessary to have double reporting of the same information. The amendment to that Act will therefore eliminate the re quirement of double reporting. Finally, Mr. Speaker, The Frozen Food Act is amended by repealing

Part 2. As I indicated in the course of first reading of the Bill, we'll be putting that part permanently on ice. Hon. members will probably recall, in their younger days, walking down to the frozen food locker on Satur day to pick up the turkey, chicken, or roast. On a hot summer day, Mr. Speaker, that was an enjoyable trip, because it gave you respite from the heat as you walked into the cooler to get your turkey, roast, or what have you. DR. BUCK: There's been air conditioning. MR. KOZIAK: True, there's been air conditioning.

Cir cumstances have changed substantially since 20 or so years ago — I guess maybe it's longer than that, 30 years ago — and with the coming into their own of the home freezer and the new refrigerators with separate compart ments for freezers, frozen food lockers are relics of the past and the basis of archaeological study in the future. The information I could share with hon. members with respect to that part of the Act would indicate that only four guarantees were ever given under the provisions of this Act.

Those were to the Stony Plain Cold Storage and Locker Association Limited, back in August 1946; the Donalda Cooperative Locker Plant Association, back in February '49; the Fairview Cooperative Refrigerated Locker Association Limited, back in November 1946 — that was before the hon. member aspired to represent the people of that constituency; and the Hanna Cooperative Locker Association, in April 1946. Three of those co operatives have since been struck off and no longer do business. The Stony Plain co-operative changed its name to Stony Plain Co-Op Limited, and I understand is operating successfully today.

The information I have is that there are no guarantees other than those four. From my understanding, the sum total of $27,500 guaranteed for the four locker plants has all been repaid, and

Part 2 of The Frozen Food Act is no longer necessary and would be repealed by Bill 2, The Consumer and Corporate Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 1980. I urge all hon. members to vote in favor of the Bill. [Motion carried; Bill 2 read a second time] Bill 3 The Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 1980 MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 3, The Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 1980. Mr. Speaker, this Bill addresses three statutes of the province of Alberta, the first being The Administration of Estates Act.

Two changes are proposed in order to make the administration of small estates easier for people who find themselves in the position of having to deal with that. By definition, a small estate has always been one where it was thought the value of property was under $1,000. It is proposed to change that to $3,000. I might mention that when a person is acting as the administrator of such an estate, often it is not a large enough matter — although there may be some complexities to it — to seek legal counsel with respect to it.

For that reason the rules have always provided over the years that a simplified procedure might be provided by the probate court, and that people might be able to deal directly with the clerk. Other than the change in the amount defining a small estate, it is proposed that the procedures can be establish ed by regulation. The reason for that is that although the statute referred to some aspects of the procedure before, it did not give a comprehensive or indeed adequate de scription of how a person should proceed in such a case.

The philosophy being that having procedural matters in statute is not the most suitable way to handle them, the changes in this legislation would remove the procedural features and provide authorization to deal with them in regulations. In that way relatively simple forms can be produced and readily amended if required from time to time without the need of dealing with the statute. Two Provincial Court Acts are to be amended too, Mr.

Speaker, in the proposed Bill: The Provincial Court Act, which is the existing law on the subject in Alberta, and The Provincial Court Act, 1978, which is not yet in force but is expected to be later this year. My estimate of when it would be in force is that it could well be while the spring sitting is still on. But in the event it doesn't come into force by proclamation until, say, July, we are pro posing to amend both the existing legislation and the one that will then come into force, in order that there be continuous coverage by the proposed amendment.

That amendment allows for retroactivity in the pay ment of the salaries of Provincial Court judges. The reason, Mr. Speaker, is that we have recently arrived at a very satisfactory solution to the continuing concern over whether Provincial Court judges are adequately or satis factorily paid. That solution has been to tie it, by way of a percentage, to the tracking of federal judges' remunera tion. The federal people occasionally make their pay

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 153 ments retroactive, and we wanted the same capacity on behalf of Provincial Court judges in order to keep that arrangement functioning smoothly. It will mean that it doesn't have to come to the Legislature each time, but will be an automatic and smooth transition when a change in remuneration is to be given effect. The other one, Mr. Speaker, The Uniformity of Legis lation Act, deals with the statute under which the prov ince participates in the uniformity of legislation confer ences which are held in Canada each year.

All that is proposed is that the number of uniformity commissioners be increased from three to six. We've found that that would accord more closely to the number of people actually required to attend such conferences on behalf of the province. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 3 read a second time] Bill 4 The Department of Government Services Amendment Act, 1980 MR. McCRAE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to move Bill No. 4, The Department of Government Services Amendment Act, 1980. Mr.

Speaker, this amendment increases the limit in the statutory advance account for Government Services from $45 million to $60 million. By way of explanation, the department was created by Act of this Legislature in 1975 to provide common services to other government de partments. Part of the objective of the department is to provide services to other departments through what we call an advance account, sometimes erroneously referred to as a revolving fund. In any event, the amount specified in the original fund was $45 million.

Because of the complexities of govern ment, and all the economic activity going on in the province, which has caused some modest increase in the size of government — not in proportion, naturally, to the scope of activity going on in the province, but still some growth — we are finding it important to increase the size of the fund to $60 million for the next several years. The type of activity that takes place in the fund is specified in

section 12 of The Department of Government Services Act, and includes the acquiring of equipment, services and supplies, vehicles, aircraft, printing, duplicat ing, publishing, warehousing, distribution, and any other necessary supplies and services. Just a further brief explanation of the way the fund operates. There are two major aspects of it. One is the purchase of fixed assets, and the other is the purchase of labor and other types of contracts. Both are purchased through the fund and are then charged back to the dif ferent departments, as they are used, on a user-pay basis.

As charges are made to the various departments and funds are received, they are paid back into the fund. That is where the revolving aspect comes. Mr. Speaker, beyond that we shouldn't need any fur ther explanation; I think that pretty well covers it. I would ask all members to support the increase in the fund from $45 million to $60 million so the important services we have been providing will continue to be provided. [Motion carried; Bill 4 read a second time] Bill 5 The Distress of Leased Chattels Act MR. HIEBERT: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to introduce second reading of Bill 5, The Distress of Leased Chattels Act. The general thrust of this Bill, Mr. Speaker, gives the lessor the right to seize chattels under a written lease through either default by the lessee or normal termination of the lease. The Bill outlines the documentation, proce dures, and right of entry a sheriff requires to effect a seizure. The Bill also deals with and provides for notices of objection partially before actual seizure and during actual seizure. Another aspect of the Bill deals with the disposal and release of seized chattels.

It also deals with the order of replevin if a notice of objection is given within 14 days, and makes provision for the sheriff, the lessor, or the lessee to apply to the courts for any objections. Another aspect of the Bill provides for penalties for non-delivered seized chattels and for unauthorized seizures. Mr. Speaker, I invite members of the House to support second reading of Bill No. 5. [Motion carried; Bill 5 read a second time] CLERK ASSISTANT: Bill No. 7, The Radiation Protec tion Amendment Act, 1980. The hon. Mr. Diachuk. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, the hon. minister is apparently not present.

I ask that the next one be called. Bill 8 The Service of Documents During Postal Interruptions Act MR. KUSHNER: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 8, The Service of Documents During Postal Interruptions Act. The Institute of Law Research and Reform has recently done a report, entitled Service of Documents During Postal Interruptions. The rules of court, various statutes, and the common law allow service of various kinds of documents by mail. When there is interruption of postal service, difficulties are involved in delivering the docu ments.

The Act deals with what happens when there is a postal service interruption. [Motion carried; Bill 8 read a second time] Bill 23 The Wildlife Amendment Act, 1980 MR. MILLER: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 23, The Wildlife Amendment Act, 1980. In this Act we add the definition of "habitat", because of the importance of maintaining and enhancing our wild life habitat. It is becoming an increasing concern, as industrial development is going on throughout the prov ince. It concerns enhancing and maintaining habitat not only on Crown lands but on private lands.

Many of you are aware of a program currently under way, where we are fencing off some streams, particularly some of the trout streams in Caroline. This became necessary because deterioration of the stream banks was decreasing the spawning areas and, as a result, the fish habitat was suffering. As well, we have agreements in place with private individuals in the Red Deer area. These are

154 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 farmers who are setting aside portions of their property for wildlife so that pheasants and deer will have some place to browse and to nest. It's working out very satisfactorily. We are also broadening the definition of "provincial park" to include the road allowances bounded on both sides by a park and deemed to be part of the park. We are proposing regulations for the issuing of licences or permits for the transportation and possession of wild life.

And it provides for the authority to make regulations for the marking, identification, and registration of birds of prey or of some wild sheep heads. It will provide authority to make regulations concern ing the sale of wildlife. For example, pet shops are presently selling wildlife. We would like to make the control there, because in many instances individuals are purchasing wildlife unknowingly, which is contrary to the Act as presently written. It's our concern that we be able to monitor wildlife and control the types of animals being sold by pet shops.

We are instituting changes to allow for regulations for humane trapping, which will regulate the types of devices used to trap animals. In this way we hope to be able to institute a program where we would have more humane trapping of our fur-bearing animals. We are also concerned about the carrying and discharg ing of firearms from boats under certain conditions. For example, as the Act presently reads, in the regulations you can fire a shotgun from a boat powered by muscle power; however, if you have a motorboat, even though you drive out and anchor in the weeds, it is contrary to the law.

We hope to be able to make it so that if you use a little motorboat and stop it, you would be able to shoot ducks from a properly anchored boat. We are also providing authority in the regulations to collect compensation for damages caused to habitat on public land. Right now we have a concern about the amount of industrial development going on in certain areas of the province. We hope to be able to collect funds, and even though we wouldn't spend them in that specific location, we would be able to use these funds to establish habitat in some other area more suitable for the wildlife population.

We also want flexibility for individuals keeping wildlife as pets. We feel that we should be able to allow individu als to keep wildlife as pets under certain terms and conditions. For example, last fall we had an occasion where a farmer was going home, a deer crossed the road, and he hit it with his car. He took it home and had a veterinarian come in and take care of it. It was a breach of the Act for him to keep that fawn on his farm. We feel that under the circumstances, with the proper terms and conditions, he should be allowed to do that. Mr.

Speaker, this is pretty well the substance of the amendment to this Act. With these amendments, we hope we'll be able not only to maintain and enhance our habitat but also to allow flexibility under certain condi tions for people to be able to keep wildlife as pets. I beg the support of the Legislature for this Bill. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to say to the minister that I support his Bill. I have one or two concerns, and one or two questions I'd like to ask the minister.

First of all, the role of habitat provision for animals, wild game birds, et cetera: when he closes debate I'd like to know if the minister feels that the Buck for Wildlife program — which means one dollar, not yours truly — is doing what it is intended to do? Should it be enlarged or reviewed? What is going to come of it? I've spoken to many farmers who have an area they can't farm.

For a long time they have been discussing: should this not be assessed or taxed — some type of mechanism whereby the farmer can be encouraged to leave this bit of land and provide some habitat protection for game birds and wild animals. It's unfortunate that we can't turn back the wheels of time, Mr. Minister.

But there would be some real merit to leaving X metres along fence lines in areas of the province where we are opening up new farms, so we wouldn't have to turn around and buy trees or get trees from the Department of Agriculture, to replant trees that are al ready there to provide protection for game animals and birds. I know from speaking to wildlife officers, that a deer will not go more than X metres from shelter or someplace where it can hide. You seldom see animals going across wide expanses of open field. Mr.

Minister, in the new areas we're opening up, let's leave the trees there, and make it mandatory that they not be knocked down. Not only do we provide cover for animals, but we also cut down soil and wind erosion. I know we can't do anything for the large areas we have, but let's have a look at that in the new areas we're opening. The other question I have for the minister is: has there been any resolution of the problem that's developed in the area just outside of Calgary, where a private owner had exotic animals?

The entire business of exotic animals should be looked at very closely in conjunction with the minister's federal counterpart, because some of the things we're bringing into this country are really nothing but exotic animals. I think we should have a very good look at what we allow to come into the country and what we do not. With that brief statement, Mr. Speaker, I welcome the minister's response. MR. SPEAKER: May the hon. minister conclude the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. MILLER: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. I ap preciate the remarks of the hon. Member for Clover Bar.

He raises some excellent points with regard to wildlife habitat. The Buck for Wildlife program has certainly been successful, and representations have been made to extend the program. I would like to mention — and I know the hon. member is aware — that I don't think farmers are in terested so much in the few dollars they get for leaving land in its natural state as they are in recognition of the fact they're doing it. Last year I think 24 farmers in the county of Red Deer participated in the program. We did pay them some money for leaving land in its natural state.

But it seemed to me that the greatest incentive was that we gave each of those farmers a gate sign, so that he was recognized as a farmer participating in the project to maintain habitat for wildlife. I hope we could extend that program, because it certainly was well received down there. Where we had 24 farmers last year, we're looking at 80-odd farmers this year. The idea of not assessing land left in its natural state has certainly been brought forward before. Under our program we are paying for it to be left in its natural state, so it counterbalances somewhat.

I would think the money the farmer receives would be his taxes plus a little more for leaving it out of production.

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 155 As far as Crown land development is concerned, we are doing this on much of our grazing reserves, where we have input from wildlife people before the actual clearing and breaking takes place. We recognize the fact that animals have to have escape routes. He's absolutely cor rect when he says that if a deer can follow brush, it will; if there's no brush, then it gets a little wary and tends to restrict itself to a certain area. The idea of leaving strips of brush around fences is certainly commendable.

As he points out, it's good not only for wildlife habitat but for wind and water erosion. I think people tend to recognize more that wildlife is an important resource. We have an extensive pheasant hatching program, where we hope to be able to stock more of the province in areas where there were many pheasants before. For example, we hope to get pheasant habitat established around the Camrose area . . . DR. BUCK: Fort Saskatchewan. MR. MILLER: . . . and Fort Saskatchewan, as a mem ber points out. Farmers are certainly aware of the pro gram and are fully in support.

With regard to exotic animals, certain conditions have to be met by game farms. I'm quite happy that the proposed big game farm at the Red Barn — and actually it's going ahead — is progressing very rapidly. They have built a barn for the African animals and presently have 250 different species. It's certainly something we're look ing forward to. Because of the safety factor, some of the animals from outside Calgary have been transferred to Brooks. We were concerned for the public that the facilities in which those wild animals, exotic cats, were being kept were inadequate. We were afraid they would get out.

They're temporarily being held in Brooks, and we hope to be able to place them in some other farm shortly. [Motion carried; Bill 23 read a second time] Bill 14 The Municipal Election Amendment Act, 1980 MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 14, The Municipal Election Amendment Act, 1980. Mr. Speaker, the main provisions of this particular Bill make it abundantly clear that persons who live on mili tary bases in Alberta have the right to vote in municipal plebiscites and municipal elections.

For many years per sons in certain military establishments were voting by way of a definition provided by the local returning officer or others. But a more definitive review of the Act, after an experience in Calgary in 1979, indicated that residents of military bases were prohibited from voting in such plebiscites or municipal elections, hence the change pro posed in this Bill. In addition I should say, Mr. Speaker, that there is an amendment to the

section that deals with the eligibility of an individual in a rural municipality to seek office. The present situation is that it's expected that an individual seeking office will reside in the electoral division he wants to represent. However, a

section in the Act has allowed some persons to define "place of residence" as other than the one they actually reside in, resulting in about half a dozen situations across the province where the true intent of the Act is not being carried out and rural councillors are in fact living in areas they do not represent. So there are some amendments here to ensure that that principle of having to live within the electoral division one seeks to represent is maintained. Mr.

Speaker, beyond that some minor amendments to the legislation largely provide for a clean-up of sections of the Act that existed back in the days when persons were able to vote on the basis of the property they owned rather than their eligibility as a resident of Alberta and of a particular municipal district. Those, Mr. Speaker, are the main principles involved in this Bill, and I recommend the support of all members of the Assembly. MR. D. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to rise brief ly in support of this particular Bill.

The incident the hon. minister mentioned with respect to the military base in Calgary happened within my constituency. The people on the Currie military base had been allowed to vote for some 11 years. Then, as a result of a different interpreta tion of the Act, they were precluded from doing so in the plebiscite which took place in the fall.

I would like to compliment the hon. minister and the government on moving very quickly in ensuring that this fundamental human right is extended to those people who have had that opportunity before in Calgary, and to some in other parts of the province who have not before had the opportunity to vote in civic elections. I believe it's a very positive amendment, a crucial and necessary one, and I support very much the minister's call for our support of that Bill in second reading. [Motion carried; Bill 14 read a second time] Bill 12 The University of Alberta Hospital Amendment Act, 1980 MR. MACK: Mr.

Speaker, I wish to move second read ing of Bill 12, The University of Alberta Hospital Amendment Act, 1980.

The main thrust of the Bill is to expand the powers and objectives of the University of Alberta Hospital board, to enable it to operate the Health Sciences Centre currently under construction; to formalize the relationship between the University of Alberta Hospital and the University of Alberta, particularly the Faculty of Medicine, with re spect to their individual responsibilities and interdepen dence in the totally integrated facility of the Health Sciences Centre; and to define the role and objectives of the university hospital board with regard to its responsi bilities in administering the Health Sciences Centre.

That is the basic thrust of the amendments contained in Bill 12, Mr. Speaker. [Motion carried; Bill 12 read a second time] head: CONSIDERATION OF HIS HONOUR THE LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR'S SPEECH Moved by Dr. Reid: That an humble address be presented to His Honour the Honourable the Lieutenant-Governor of Alberta as follows: To His Honour the Honourable Frank Lynch-Staunton, Lieutenant-Governor of the province of Alberta: We, Her Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly, now assembled, beg leave to thank

156 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 Your Honour for the gracious speech Your Honour has been pleased to address to us at the opening of the present session. [Adjourned debate March 28: Dr. Buck] DR. BUCK: I plan to keep my remarks this afternoon brief. But it seems that once you get through the pre amble, it takes a little longer than you'd anticipated. But I hope, Mr. Speaker [interjection] — I'll come to you, Horst — that my remarks will be constructive, and provide a little direction and advice for a few of the members of the government caucus.

As per tradition, I would like to congratulate the hon. mover and the hon. seconder. I'd like to tell a little story about the mover before he leaves, before he moves, about an experience we had when we were in Germany. We were at a reception, and one of the members of the hosting group said to me, "Oh, you're Dr. Reid." I said, "No, I'm sorry, he's the bald one." [laughter] I would just like to say at this time, before we get into the debate on the legislative Committee on Workers' Compensation, that it was a privilege to serve on that committee with the members in the group.

I think we worked very hard, and I hope our committee report will bear some fruit. Mr. Speaker, I have seen a few throne speeches come down the road in my tenure in this Legislature, and I would have to say that this is probably one of the worst ones I have ever seen. MR. BATIUK: That's what you said last year. [laughter] DR. BUCK: No, if the hon. Member for Vegreville were capable of reading, I think he would find I didn't say that. I would like to say that up to this time, I really felt the Premier was going to stay on for another term.

But now I am just as convinced that the Premier will be quitting after all the ribbon cutting that goes on this year, and possibly the middle of next year, because all this was, Mr. Speaker, was a caretaker speech. The government is derelict of new ideas. It is nothing but, ho-hum, we will just go through the motions; you know, we got a large mandate last year, so everybody in Alberta loves us. Well, 40 per cent of the voting population didn't think that way, and we get many criticisms that the Premier knows nothing but oil, oil, oil. He doesn't know there are people in this province. All he worries about is oil.

I'd like to say to my hon. friend the minister from Edmonton Avonmore: when the minister rose today in great indignation about the fact that the former minister Mr. Dickie is on the government payroll, I don't know why he would be so upset. The former minister's been on the payroll since he got out of this Legislature, so I don't know why the minister of, now listen to this title, Minis ter of State for Economic Development — International Trade. Mr.

Speaker, in the old days when you were a monied person in England, if you had a problem son, you sent him over to Canada or the United States and you called him a remittance man. You gave him a pension, which the minister's going to have, and you gave him a subsidy so he would live in the manner to which he was accustomed. When the Premier had a little trouble with the adminis trative abilities of the minister, he sent him on this world tour he takes about two or three times a year. That's a great way to keep the minister out of the Premier's hair, Mr. Speaker. I compliment the Premier on that manoeuvre.

I don't know if it's done any good as far as taxpayers in Alberta go, but at least it keeps the minister out of the Premier's hair. [interjections] Mind you, the people who were so used to the hon. minister coming with pockets full of cheques to hand out miss him. The Premier didn't know that he handed out 600 cheques, $6 million, but that's how it goes. Sometimes the Premier can't keep track of all his ministers. Mr. Speaker, the point in the throne speech that both ered me more than anything was the complete disregard for agriculture, one of our major industries in this prov ince.

We have pursued what is happening to our pork industry in this province. I hear another minister is just going through the motions for the next three years. He thinks he's had enough of public life, so he's just going to put in time for the next three years and retire to his farm and pick up his pension. Mr. Speaker, we don't need ministers who are just going to go through the motions and not looking after a primary industry. We need an aggressive minister. We need a minister who shows some initiative. We're not getting that aggressiveness and initiative.

We used to sit on the government side and have to listen to the former Deputy Premier, the hon. Hugh Horner, telling us, phone Ottawa, write Ottawa, do some thing. And do you know what? He was right. Well, now we're giving the same advice to the present Minister of Agriculture: do something. Because two out of three phone calls I get in my office or my home are from farmers who are in great difficulty; not only pork produc ers, but all farmers, especially farmers who have the guaranteed loans that are prime plus one. They just can't make it. It's about time the minister showed some initiative.

Another minister I'd like to give a bit of advice to is the Minister of Environment. When you have a problem and don't want to make any decisions, just set up a commit tee. In fairness to the PC candidate I ran against in 1971, Mr. Devereux never received a job until now. So I think it was about time they gave John a job. He's on the committee looking at the management of hazardous waste products. The hon. gentleman will do a good job. I compliment the government, because I thought they'd forgotten about John, a long-time Tory friend. It's just right that he get a little bit of a job.

We're looking forward to the report being brought in. But I would like to say to the Minister of Environment at this time: Fort Saskatchewan does not want that plant. I cannot make it any stronger than that. We do not want that plant in our community. MR. NOTLEY: They don't want it in Two Hills either. DR. BUCK: I would like to bring to the attention of government members that this government and this Pre mier run this province like a big corporation. There's nothing wrong with that, Mr. Speaker, as long as you remember that you are supposed to be looking after people. That's where this government falls short.

The Premier does a good job looking after Alberta, but what does he do for Albertans? The Premier stood in his place and said he has every confidence in the sensitivity and knowledge of the hon. Minister of Social Services and Community Health. Well, all the Premier has to do is read the letters to the editor and listen to the open-line shows, and he would find out very quickly that the people in Alberta don't think the same way. I have great compassion for a minister. He

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 157 can't know everything that's going on in his department. But it's not the first time, and it's not the second time. It's the third time, Mr. Speaker. Therefore, I have come to the conclusion that the minister's not running the de partment; the department's running the minister. Under those circumstances the minister should be changed. I say that not because I do not like the hon. gentleman. I like the gentleman. But if he's not doing the job, it's the responsibility of the Premier, and his responsibility only, to change that minister.

This government has had a long and sad history of not changing ministers who should have been changed. That is what leadership is all about. We saw the big orange and blue signs about leadership. That is not leadership. Deci sions have to be made. Some of them are unpleasant. But if they have to be made, they have to be made. That department needs a shake-up, and the minister has to make that shake-up. If the minister is not capable of doing it, you have to change the minister, Mr. Speaker. It's that plain and simple. Another area: the Minister Responsible for Native Af fairs. I heard this with my own ears, Mr.

Speaker. The minister — what's that long term — the Minister of State for Economic Development — International Trade, had the audacity to jump up on some kind of point, worried that I was saying unkind things about the former minister Mr. Dickie. I wasn't saying anything unkind about him, except that he's getting taxpayer's money. What I am very concerned about is that when the former minister MR. SINDLINGER: Mr. Speaker, point of order. MR. SCHMID: Sit down, Walt, there's a point of order. DR. BUCK: I'll wait for the Speaker's ruling, because he's taking my time. MR. SINDLINGER: Mr.

Speaker, I apologize to the hon. member. I don't wish to intrude on his speech. However, on several occasions this afternoon he has re ferred to a former member of this House, and made several allegations . . . DR. BUCK: It doesn't need any allegation, Tom. MR. SCHMID: Aw, shut up. [interjections] MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. SINDLINGER: . . . in regard to that former mem ber receiving funds from the government for his work on an athletic group in Calgary. I was wondering if it would be appropriate at this time, Mr.

Speaker, if the Member for Clover Bar would care to substantiate what he is saying or, in effect, either put up or shut up. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, I'll ask the hon. member to withdraw that statement, because I think it's unparlia mentary. If the hon. member had his ears in tune with what I am saying, I am not accusing the former minister Mr. Dickie of anything he does in private life. I am saying that the minister is now at the public trough in his present capacity, and in two or three other capacities the former minister had; not what the hon. member over here is talking about, Mr. Speaker.

I would like the hon. member to remember that he has a parliamentary system to follow here. The hon. member can withdraw that statement, because I never made any such allegation. If the member would just listen, he would have no difficulty in ascertaining what I am saying. MR. SINDLINGER: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to assure the hon. member that I pay a great deal attention to what he has to say, and I listen very carefully. But in his response and rebuttal, again he has said that Mr. Dickie is at the public trough. I ask him, please, in all respect, to substan tiate what he is saying. MR.

SPEAKER: I would have to agree that to say that someone is at the public trough has certain implications, some of them agricultural. [laughter] But I suppose if we consider that people in the public service and all the members of this Assembly are in the same situation, that may or may not lend that term some respectability. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, it's an old parliamentary ex pression that we somehow have used over . . . [interjec tions] Oh, Horsty, don't be so sensitive. Don't be so sensitive. We'll give you another trip. We'll send you someplace. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, the point that really did dis turb me the other morning, when a minister of the Crown made an accusation outside this House that the president of the Indian Association of this province was making statements just . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. There is undoubtedly a very wide latitude established by parliamentary custom with regard to the debate concerning the motion for the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne, and also the debate on the budget, but I would question whether that latitude could, by any stretch, be extended to taxing people with statements made outside the House. DR.

BUCK: In pursuing my concern for the lack of initiatives in native affairs in this document known as the throne speech, 1980, Mr. Speaker, I was very, very ap palled at the statement made by the minister of the Crown, that the leader of the native people in this prov ince was making speeches just to benefit his own political ends. I think a minister of the Crown who makes that kind of statement to the leader duly elected by his people should withdraw and apologize, not only to that individ ual but to the native people of this province. Mr.

Speak er, I get hassled by the Tory backbenchers because I bring these things to their attention. I know they are unpleasant, but be it as it may, I think the minister should apologize. AN HON. MEMBER: Agreed. DR. BUCK: The hon. Minister of Social Services and Community Health, who has not been replaced — we have heard rumblings from a government that says it cares about people, that we may be getting rid of the PSS program. For some of the backbenchers who don't know what PSS means, that means preventative social services. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Preventive. DR. BUCK: Preventive.

It was initiated by the former government; I suppose that's why the government finds it

158 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 distasteful. But when we see the record of family break down, of single-parent families, this is one area we should not be cutting back on. This is one area we should be enlarging upon, because in this government's idea of everything big is better, we are going to be having more and more problems in social areas. So I say to the minister responsible: let's not cut back on these programs; let's enlarge them, because the problems are going to be enlarging. I'd like to say, Mr.

Speaker, that I was quite amused when the government that prides itself on supposedly showing new initiatives, the Solicitor General said we had a design problem in the new Remand Centre. A design problem. Isn't that interesting. So $400,000 later we find out that we should put bars in the place. Now that is design; that is a design problem. The correctional situa tion in this province is becoming a laughing matter. It is a joke. It's a joke in our community. But I would like to say we are not laughing very much anymore, because we have had the second instance of hostage-taking in our community.

The people in Fort Saskatchewan have had about as much as they can stand from the ineptitude in the Solicitor General's Department. But most of the problems are not recognized by the Solicitor General's Department. We have to have more people to work in those places, and we have to raise their pay. It's basically that simple. It's fine for the government to say, we have guidelines. They have guidelines when they feel it's to their advantage. But when they want to change those guidelines, they change them very, very rapidly.

So I would like to say that the people of my commu nity have had about as much as they can stand as far as escapes and hostage-takings go. One of these times, Mr. Speaker, it's going to be even more unsavory than it has been the last two times. I say to the hon. Solicitor General that he'd better shape up his act. I would like to make a comment, Mr. Speaker, on a problem dealing with law enforcement that the people of the province were made aware of several weeks ago when a young RCMP constable was shot, not once, not twice, but three times.

It's fortunate no more bullets were left, because that young man would not be alive today. Mr. Speaker, I see nothing in this document, nothing, to indicate the severity of the problem we have in this province, and the hesitancy on the part of the government to come up with new programs. We hope there will be something in the budget to recognize that we need more manpower for our RCMP and for our city and county police, because the people of this province are demanding more from us as politicians than we are getting in the area of law enforcement.

The incident was very unfortunate, but it could have been more unfortunate had that young man been killed. At this time I would like to change my own philosophy on capital punishment. If we are going to get young men to go into the RCMP or the city police, I think they must be protected from the criminal element. As I say, I have changed my own philosophy in this. I think that capital punishment should be reinstituted for the cold-blooded murder of police officers and guards while in the line of duty. Mr.

Speaker, I could understand a young person or anyone in the act of committing a felony, firing a shot, trying to escape custody. But when a criminal stands over a police officer and fires, not once, but three times, then the intent is quite obvious. So I say to hon. members that we had better give our officers the type of protection they deserve. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I would like to read part of a letter into the record to show that this government doesn't care about its people. We heard the Minister of Housing and Public Works tell us all the great things that are being done in housing.

Well, I would just like to read a line or two — and I have permission from this young lady — about what this young Albertan thinks about her prospects for having a home of her own. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The young lady doesn't happen to be a member of this Assembly, and there is therefore some question as to whether she should partici pate in debate. I realize this is a somewhat shadowy area as to when documents or papers may be read in the Assembly and when not.

Generally speaking, I think it would be a very safe and proper procedure if the reading of information to the Assembly were confined to such things as statistics, involved facts that a member couldn't be expected to state confidently from memory. But when it comes to outright argument, certainly any parliamen tary precedents or tradition that I have ever read would indicate that that is the exclusive privilege of the members of the Assembly. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, I will accept that ruling, though I don't agree with it. [interjections] AN HON. MEMBER: I don't agree with it either, Walt. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, I am here to represent the wishes and the expression of those wishes of my constitu ents. So I will go along with your ruling, but I will summarize what this young couple said in their letter. The way things are going as rents are increasing, as the cost of living is increasing, and as the cost of housing and interest is increasing, in their lifetime, in this so-called affluent Alberta, they will never have a home of their own. And as a parent, I am concerned that my four children may never be able to afford a home of their own in this so-called affluent Alberta. And so, Mr.

Speaker, I say again: the Premier looks after Alberta, but who is looking after Albertans? The so-called Heritage Savings Trust Fund is for future generations. These young people say: am I never going to make use of that fund? Should it not be available to me for low interest rates, so I can own my own home? [interjections] It is? It is? Obviously the Tory backbenchers don't get the same kinds of letters we do. Either that or they disregard them, as they did the letters on The Planning Act. They just disregard them if they're unpleasant.

They like to hear only pleasant things; they never like to hear unpleasant things. [interjections] And it is unpleasant to hear young Albertans saying they may never own their own homes. So we could use some imagination in the use of the Heritage Savings Trust Fund for Albertans to build their own homes. Mr. Speaker, for the last three to four years my hon. colleague Mr. Mandeville, the Member for Bow Valley, has brought to the government's attention the fact that the government is going to have to be responsible for some of the heavy services if we're going to cut down the cost of servicing. As hon. member Mr.

R. Speaker said, the government reacts after it's pushed into a situation. We've forgotten about "now", we've forgotten about thrust, and we've forgotten about new directions, because we are nothing more than a caretaker government. That's why we have forgotten. The performance of the Minister

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 159 of Consumer and Corporate Affairs this afternoon indi cates the government does not realize the seriousness of the situation for renters, people on fixed incomes, and young couples wanting their own homes in this so-called affluent Alberta. I'd like to make a comment or two about highways, Mr. Speaker. I now can understand why the Minister of Transportation was supposed to spearhead this drive to divert rivers from flowing north, to have them flow south.

If the minister doesn't have any more luck with that than he does finding heavy oil and asphalt in Alberta, they'll never get a drop of water in the eastern prairies, the area he represents. Can you imagine a minister of the Crown standing in this Legislature and telling us they don't have sufficient heavy oil in Alberta to pave their cotton-pickin' roads? Talk about a caretaker government. Where have they been? MR. NOTLEY: Gone fishin'. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I will lobby as strongly as I can to give the minister some funding.

I say $1 billion should be spent on the highways in this province over the next five to seven years. If the Premier would get out of his airplane and drive on some of those roads, he would find out that the present roads are deteriorating at a very, very rapid rate, never mind new construction. Can anybody in this Assembly remem ber driving on a road that has had chips put on it within the last month? [interjections] I can tell you how many times I've seen it: one road, 25 miles that's had new chipping put on it. One road. A pretty sorry record. MR. BATIUK: In one constituency. DR. BUCK: When the hon.

Member for Vegreville first came here, we were going to finish Highway 15. It's still not finished, John. And who built the first regional water supply line in Alberta, hon. Member for Vegreville? It wasn't the Tories. It was the Socreds. MR. BATIUK: Where? DR. BUCK: Where? Get on the ball, John. Find out. From Edmonton, through Bremner, to Fort Saskatche wan, to Redwater, and then to Gibbons. My friend from Vegreville, Mr. Batiuk, talks about the regional water supply line: where is it? AN HON. MEMBER: It's coming. DR. BUCK: It's coming. But you'd better not drink that water, because it may be your last drink.

If you have to wait for the water supply line, you may never get another drink of water. [interjections] We need the regional water line from Fort Saskatchewan, to Bruderheim, to Lamont, to Chipman, to Vegreville, through Mundare. AN HON. MEMBER: It's coming. DR. BUCK: Let's not just bring these Mickey Mouse resolutions to the Legislature. Let's have some action. That's what government is all about: providing service to its people. MR. BATIUK: That resolution proved fruitful, Walter. DR. BUCK: I know the resolution proved fruitful. The hon. Member for Vegreville thought I would get up and say, what a great idea.

It's a great idea, but where have the member and the government been for the last eight years? I support the concept, but I support action much more. Actions speak louder than concepts. So I say to my neighbor the hon. Member for Vegreville: I believe in that concept and I support that concept, but let's get the water flowing. That's what we're talking about. AN HON. MEMBER: And build the roads. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, we have a major undertaking in this province to get our roads back up to shape.

This government has not done a good job keeping up with road construction, never mind trying to maintain the roads built by the previous government, the finest roads in North America. [interjections] Laugh. Just ask the people, hon. minister. It's too bad you weren't here. If I had, you would have resigned four times. MR. R. CLARK: Just once would have been enough. AN HON. MEMBER: Is this your leadership platform? DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, the last area I'd like to touch on is education as it applies to the Heritage Savings Trust Fund.

If I had to generalize, I feel the group of people who have their ear the closest to the ground and do some of the deepest thinking are farmers. It was a farmer who said to me: Mr. Politican, we talk about the Heritage Savings Trust Fund for the future; I'm not very smart, but if we put a lot more money into education than we're doing now, the future would look after itself. If I could summarize it as concisely as that, I would probably make a better politician. What that man said is if we put adequate funding into education, the future will look after itself. Mr.

Speaker, the last one or two points before my time elapses are on the question of a just and fair settlement for the nurses of this province. MR. NOTLEY: Hear, hear. DR. BUCK: The hon. Minister of Labour can delay the decision-making process as long as he can, but what it boils down to is that the Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care and the Provincial Treasurer are going to have to loosen the purse strings. That's what it's all about. Our nurses in this province are grossly underpaid. And until that problem is resolved, Mr.

Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care, you're not only going to have a very, very difficult time staffing the present hospi tals, but an impossible job staffing your new hospitals. I was quite appalled to see the minister's indifference when he felt we could just go out of the province or out of the country to recruit nurses. What are we doing about recruiting, and getting back into service the nurses we already have, the ones who have quit because the pay is not adequate and the working conditions are very diffi cult? Until the hon.

Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care resolves that problem, we will be constantly unde rstaffed in our hospitals. The Minister of Advanced Education and Manpower won't have to worry about enlarging the facilities at our universities and community colleges, because nobody will want to take the courses. Mr. Speaker, I'm not quite as enthusiastic as the government backbenchers about this document. But in

160 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 closing I'd like to say I want the record to show that, in the part of the document where we talk about oil pricing negotiations, I as an individual representative, and our members as a caucus, support this government and have always supported this government in making sure that resources belong to the producing provinces. I would like to say that only one government in the history of this province has received above world prices for its resources. That government was the one before this one. The last point I would like to make on that, Mr.

Speaker, is that I think the people in eastern Canada had better realize what we have done to keep their economy going. Why can they not understand it is better that the money come to western Canadians and stay in Canada than go across the pond to the Middle East, because that is exactly what is happening now. They are denying us, as Albertans, our rightful price, but they don't seem to hesitate to send extra millions and billions of dollars to a country outside Canada. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MRS. CHICHAK: Mr. Speaker, it certainly gives me great pleasure today to participate in the debate on the throne speech.

Before I get into my remarks, I'd like to congratulate the Lieutenant-Governor on his first presen tation of a throne speech, and my hon. colleagues who have moved and seconded the Speech from the Throne. I think they did a very admirable job. Their remarks left a lot of food for thought. As well, we need to remind ourselves how fortunate we are in having you as our Speaker of the Legislative Assembly. I think the admir able job you do with respect to preserving and maintain ing the decorum of this House is second to none, not only in this country but I would say internationally. Mr.

Speaker, before I get into my remarks, I can't resist making some remarks with respect to those issues raised by the hon. Member for Clover Bar. It's very intriguing to listen to some of the representations. In one breath he indicates he is critical of this government taking a position that perhaps bigger is better and that we are aggressively proposing policies and programs which be come larger and larger. On the other hand, he was critical that we as a government were cutting back on PSS programs; these were his words or his representations, Mr. Speaker.

Surely if the hon. member was attentive, over these past number of years since he has served in the opposi tion, to the massive social programs this government has implemented in the interest of Alberta citizens, he could not stand in his place today and in all honesty present to the people of Alberta that we are not doing anything to help our Alberta people who are in need. He's critical of the fact that this government and our Premier are interested in looking after Alberta, but not Albertans. After all, what is Alberta? Who makes up Alberta?

Surely it's not just a piece of land with some lines drawn around it? Surely Alberta is what it is because of the people it has. Surely the people it has and the buoyant economy we are seeing today are part and parcel of what this government has been doing in the area of programs, in the interest of Albertans. Perhaps that is one of the reasons there are as many problems as we have today.

The buoyant economy and the attractiveness of this province have been bringing not only Canadians from other provinces but people from other countries, drawing them to participate in the opportunities that have been made available and designed so that citizens — not only Albertans but other Canadians and citizens from other countries — might enjoy a quality of life second to none elsewhere. I'd like to remark on two other areas the hon. member raised. One is with respect to the appointment of various former members from the government side of the House since 1971. It's interesting, Mr.

Speaker, that somewhere amongst those candidates or representatives and ap pointments, there happened to be an appointment of one John Anderson. If memory serves me right, the Alberta hail and crop commission is headed by a former Social Credit member. I really am not sure the hon. member is clear on what he is trying to say. It seems to me . . . DR. BUCK: One out of 10. MRS. CHICHAK: The hon. member says, one out of 10. There are five out of 79, so I think the ratio is in order.

I would like to raise another area, a serious one, not really to be critical, and that is with respect to the settlement of nurses' salaries. He has called on the Minis ter of Hospitals and Medical Care and the Provincial Treasurer to come in and give any salary to keep them all happy. The hon. member must know that it is not the government with whom the nursing association is nego tiating. Surely he must know it is with the Alberta Hospital Association. Who heads the Alberta Hospital Association? Unless there has been a name change, I think the former colleague of the hon.

Member for Clover Bar, the former MLA Mr. Henderson, is heading that association. AN HON. MEMBER: Former minister of health. MRS. CHICHAK: And I am sure he is doing everything possible to come to some fair and proper terms. It's not my position at this time to discuss negotiations, but there is the procedure to be followed. It would be totally improper for the hon. Minister of Labour to move into the negotiations and simply say: let's set all this negotiating aside; I'll come in and recommend to the hon. Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care and the hon.

Provincial Treasurer just to give more money; let's forget about everything else; let's not worry about the problems. That really isn't going to settle the issue. I think the issues have to be settled between the two appropriate bodies: the nurses of Alberta and the Alberta Hospital Association. And this government has not taken a stance that we would not meet whatever ultimate determination comes out of these negotiations, insofar as finances are concerned. So I think the hon. Member for Clover Bar should be a little more accurate in his presen tation to the people of Alberta as to the status.

With respect to remarks I wish to raise in regard to areas of concern and issues that relate quite closely to the people of Edmonton Norwood and the people of Alberta, but primarily to Edmonton Norwood. I have been receiv ing letters, as have other hon. members, with respect to rental rates being increased. That is unfortunate. I am very sad about the situation with regard to rental in creases. I hope the landlords would take cognizance of the fact that people are on an income, require their dwelling, and can only meet certain expenditures.

I hope they would take cognizance of the fact that there are difficulties, these are difficult times, and that they be realistic with respect to any increases. However, that is not adequate, and this government has recognized it is not adequate, because of other pressures that have been placed, not only on tenants but on landlords and all

March 31, 1980 ALBERTA HANSARD 161 Albertans and Canadians; that is, the high interest rate, the shortage of housing. The shortage of housing in this province has not oc curred because of lack of policy or program development by this government. Certainly not. Surely we must recog nize that if 2,000 to 3,000 people are coming into this province monthly, over a number of years it's going to put a strain on housing.

In private enterprise and the free market in the demo cratic system, whether it's in this country or elsewhere, when there is a strain on housing, people certainly at tempt to obtain for their revenues whatever they are able. Sometimes it is totally in proportion and acceptable; other times it is not. I would like to say with respect to housing that it is unfortunate that many of the policies that have been put in place by the federal government have affected us in Alberta, as they have affected people in other provinces.

The extensive deficit of the federal government, in the billions of dollars, which takes many tax dollars, and the curtailment of the capital cost allowance on construction, certainly caused people to hold back from the kind of investment money they have put into this industry. That is part and parcel of where we stand and the problems we face insofar as housing is concerned. I'm very pleased we have moved and will be moving with further programs in this province. Just a couple of weeks ago, the hon.

Minister of Housing and Public Works announced the family home purchase program, one of the major developments with respect to providing homes for our citizens, not only Albertans but those who are newly arrived in this province. Not everyone can buy a home; there are those who must rent. To assist those citizens, the core housing incentive program, CHIP, will go a long way to alleviate the kind of problems now being faced with respect to rentals.

I would hope the situation with rentals would not be very long lasting, that the construction industry will respond quickly to the kinds of incentives we are making available, and will bring a lot more housing on the market. But surely we must recognize that the government of Alberta alone cannot resolve the problem of housing, not when the problem is not totally of its own making. It would seem to me that the federal government has some responsibility.

If it considers Alberta as part of Confeder ation and Albertans as part of the Canadian scene, surely it has the same responsibility to this province, insofar as housing is concerned on a proper ratio, as it does to any other province. It is necessary for Albertans to recognize and put on some pressure, through their elected members in the House of Commons, with respect to areas of responsibility that the federal government has. I want to comment with respect to some of the housing available to senior citizens. I'm very pleased with some of the housing support we are providing for citizens.

Many of them in my constituency have taken advantage of the programs, particularly the Alberta pioneer home repair program. I also recognize that there are many who, for some reason or other, have not acquainted themselves or taken advantage of the program and really are eligible. Try as we may in the attempts to communicate the programs and the information to citizens, somehow or other this communication doesn't get through. It is unfor tunate that they have not taken advantage of the pro gram, and I would certainly like to encourage them to do so.

I'd like to raise an issue with the Minister of Social Services and Community Health. Although he has had to step out of the Assembly for a brief time, I'm sure he will apprize himself of my concern with respect to the Alberta assured income supplement. During the election of 1979, I undertook with many of my citizens to raise this issue with the government and with the minister in charge of this service.

I hope he would review with the government the kind of support that senior citizens are now receiving, and would take into consideration, as I'm sure he has on all other matters, their limited income, the increased cost of rentals for those who are renting, and all the other costs they are facing, and that he will consider and have included in the budget an increase in the Alberta assured income supplement for seniors. If not in the budget at this time, I would hope that through the course of this year he would seriously undertake this consideration and include it in the next budget.

I would like to revert further to the area of housing. I am very pleased with the support that has been given for families in public housing, the decrease in the rental rate announced in November 1979, at a time when there was an indication of increased interest rates and generally increased costs that the families faced. Therefore, we brought down the cost of housing for families in public housing. I know that has gone a long way. I've spoken with many families who indicated how pleased they were, and that it was a real help to them, particularly those who have a number of children.

I think it's important to note that in the current Alberta home purchase program that has been an nounced, the income for eligibility has been increased to $31,000. This will bring into the program a significant number of families. This type of program is probably the envy of all other governments in Canada. Perhaps that's one of the reasons we're having so much difficulty and criticism on the part of the federal government as to what programs they allow to flow through to this province.

They seem to indicate that Alberta, with its wealth, should carry the load totally on its own; forget that it's part of a family of Confederation; when it has reached its wealth, let it pay its own way, and set aside the massive considerations of dollars that are flowing from Alberta to other Canadians through non-renewable resource revenues. I think it's very sad that the people who are coming to this province, the increase in population that has been evident over the last number of years, have put extensive strain and demands on the total policies and programs and on the social fabric of this province.

However, we are being asked to carry it alone. I think that is totally unfair. I believe we are carrying more than our share in this great country of ours. Somewhere people will begin to feel that the buck has to stop, and fairly soon. I'd like to [speak] with respect to a couple of programs being carried out, particularly in my constituency. The neighborhood improvement program, NIP — I was very pleased when in February of this year there was an announcement on the community service fund for neigh borhood improvement, to improve the environment of communities.

A $500 million fund was made available for Alberta from the federal government and $250 million from the Alberta government. Out of, I believe, 46 communities that will be benefitting from this fund, two communities in my area are certainly receiving benefits. It is evident even now, as they are in the early stages. In one program they have completed the redevelopment of the community. I would say the people are ecstatic about what they now have in an area that was devoid of any kind of parks, social facilities, street lighting, and other * *See page 173, left column, first paragraph

162 ALBERTA HANSARD March 31, 1980 programs necessary for a viable and healthy community. The Alberta Avenue-Eastwood community is now in the midst of its development. They are exuberant about plans that are continuing to develop. The new senior citizens' self-contained, 65-unit complex now in the drawing stages and the community recreation centre also being develop ed, are bringing about a revitalization and an interest on the part of citizens in the community at this time, all of which is very healthy. The matter of day care has concerned me for some time.

Over the past years, we have attempted to introduce a day care policy and programs that would meet the needs of families, particularly those receiving social as sistance to some extent and others who are not necessari ly receiving social assistance but would really have diffi culty meeting the high cost of day care if there was no subsidization. I think that over the past couple of years we've attempted to put forward a program that, rather than go through the municipality, would help the families and keep the children in one type of facility.

We think it is healthy to have the private sector involved in the day care system. I was very pleased that we designed a program where the support could follow the child rather than go directly to the facility operation. I have a concern in that area. I've been receiving reports — they don't directly involve this government; it's a concern because they involve the municipal govern ment.

Some private day care [centres] are indicating that municipal government departments are making inspec tions and investigations so stringent and so difficult that they are perhaps beyond the guidelines, and are threaten ing to close down some of these facilities. Now we can have a concern and say: if that is true, the standards must be below what is acceptable for the facility. But I've received letters from parents indicating that they are ex tremely happy with the facility and don't want anything to happen to it.

I don't know whether the Minister of Social Services and Community Health can do anything with respect to such situations, but I would hope there might be some examination of the standards and perhaps some discus sion with the municipal government. After all, we can require that all facilities have gold doorknobs and other kinds of amenities that are not necessarily going to enhance or are basic to the service provided within the facility. I hope the minister might have some considera tion and another examination of that. With re

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19800331
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L19 S2 19800331 1430 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	541d0a1b14e90e3157ffc6e30e67ef941d325703

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