May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1165 Legislative A ssembly of Alberta Title: Monday, May 3, 2004 1:30 p.m. Date: 04/05/03 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Welcome back. Let us pray. Guide us so that we may use the privilege given to us as elected Members of the Legislative Assembly. Give us the strength to labour diligently, the courage to think and s peak with clarity and conviction and without prejudice or pride. Amen. Hon. m embers and to a ll the pe ople in the g alleries, le t’s a ll participate now in the singing of our national anthem. We’ll be led today by Mr.

Maurice Lorieau. Please participate in the language of your choice. Hon. Members: O C ana da, our ho me a nd nat ive land! True pat riot love i n al l thy so ns c ommand. With gl ow ing heart s w e see t hee ri se, The T rue N orth st rong and fr ee! Fro m fa r a nd w ide, O C anada, We st and on guard fo r thee. God kee p our l and gl orious and fr ee! O C anada, w e st and on guard fo r thee. O C anada, w e st and on guard fo r thee. The Speaker: Hon. members, Mr. Lorieau is from Calgary, so we appreciate him coming today. Thank you very much. Please be seated. head: Intr odu ction o f Visitors Mrs.

McClellan: Mr. Speaker, it is a distinct pleasure to introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly His Excellency Graham Kelly, high commissioner for New Zealand. He is seated in your gallery and is accompanied by his wife, Mrs. Janette Kelly. The high c ommissioner ha s h ad an opportunity to visit with a number o f my co lleagues i n t he Legisl ature, in cluding I b elieve yourself, w here y ou had an op portunity to discuss C anadian Parliamentary Association days. We have a number of links with New Zealand, and we have much in common. W e, of course, have our ties to the Commonwealth.

We sh are a histo ry of British p arliamentary dem ocracy. A s a member of the Cairns group of agricultural exporting countries, New Zealand is a strong Alberta ally in supporting increased liberalization of world agricultural trade. Our educational institutions in Alberta and New Zealand are enjoying student and staff exchanges. M r. Speaker, many, many opportunities abound for us to continue our relationship in trade, cultu ral, and edu cational op portunities. Certainly, I enjoyed the opportunity to discuss that with the high commissioner. Mr.

Speaker, I would ask that our honoured guest, along with his wife, please rise and receive the very traditional warm welcome of our House. head: Intro duction o f G uests Mr. Jonson: Mr. Speaker, today I have the privilege of introducing to you and through you to members of the Assembly two school groups from the Ponoka-Rimbey constituency. First of all, I wish to introduce 48 students and three teachers from the Bluffton school. The teachers are Mrs. Sharon Johnston, Mrs. Connie Jensen, and Mr. Nolan Kra uss. Plea se ri se. I would a sk tha t you g ive them the traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. Also, Mr.

Speaker, from the Rimbey elementary school we have a group of 27 students and three leaders plus helpers and one nurse. The teachers are Walter Johnson, Val Warren, and Kathy Turner. Parent helpers are Guy Beaulieu, Karen Weisgerber, and Ila Lyster. Grace Johnson is a nurse supervisor with the group. I would ask that they stand and receive the traditional warm welcome of the Assem- bly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Mar: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure to rise today to introduce to you a number of people who work with the Depart- ment of Health and Wellness, specifically in the population health strategies area. H elen Legg has been our lead on diabetes in the Alberta diabetes strategy. Sherri Wilson is our project manager on the Healthy U campaign. F ern Miller has an area of expertise in mental health. Irene Mazurenko has an area of expertise in perinatal health. Fi nally, Annette Lemire is responsible for areas of child health an d c hildren and youth w ith complex ne eds.

I ha d the opportunity to take a photograph and meet with these fine women, part of our civil service, earlier this afternoon, and I would ask that they rise and please receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wainwright. Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Sp eaker. T oday it is the gr eatest pleasure of mine to introduce to you and through you to members of this Assembly 17 students from Coronation school, which is located in Coronation, Alberta, my hometown. They’re accompanied today by their teacher a nd a f riend an d neighbo ur of m ine, Mr.

Dan Kinakin, as w ell a s by pa rent he lpers w ho a re a lso f riends and neighbours of mine: Mr. Mark Zimmer, Ms Colleen Rush, Mrs. Hilda Gardner, Mrs. Lisa Plenhert, Wanda Merchant, and Wendy Glazier. I’d as k that they rise a nd please receive the tradit ional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure for me to stand and introduce to you and through you to members of this Assembly my summer student, Mr. Peter Davis. Peter is the son of Mr. Jack Davis, who is a well-known figure in this Legislature.

Peter is in his fourth y ear of communications at Mount R oyal College and will be a great addition to our staff over the summer. I’d like to ask Peter to stand – he is seated in the members’ gallery – and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pa nnu: Thank you , Mr. Spe aker. I t’s my g reat ple asure to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a friend of long standing, Dr. Baldev Abbi. Dr. Abbi is a lifelong educator and a psychologist.

He taught in Alberta schools for 18 years a nd the n w orked in t he department of ps ychology a t t he University of Alberta for several years following his school teaching. Dr. Abbi is seated in the public gallery, and I would a sk him to please rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Yankowsky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to introduce to you and through you to this Assembly Louis and Ruth Maria Adria, who re present t he Elder A dvocates of A lberta a nd a re here to

Alberta Hansard May 3, 20041166 observe the proceedings of this House. They are seated in the members’ gallery, and I want to ask Louis and Ruth Maria to please rise and receive the very warm welcome of this Assembly. head: Oral Question Per iod The Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Emergency Hospital Services Dr. T aft: Thank y ou, Mr . Spe aker. N ew inf ormation from the Capital health region shows that emergency rooms in the Edmonton area are under siege.

T he Liberal opposition has learned that on some nights as many as 90 to 100 people in Edmonton area emer- gency rooms are assessed a nd waiting to be adm itted to hosp ital beds, more people than in this entire Assembly. An Alberta Liberal government would never have allowed this to happen. My questions are to the Minister of He alth and W ellness. G iven that Capital health h as i ndicated t hat 3 50 b eds a re n eeded i mmediately – immediately – t o alleviate its bed crisis, why has the government only committed to adding 170? 1:40 Mr. Ma r: Mr.

Speaker, the Capital health region t reats approxi- mately 370,000 pe ople in emergency rooms throug hout t he year. Patients are all assessed in emergency, and any patient with a life- threatening illness or injury receives treatment immediately. So this is a very important point to note: that people are not waiting hours to be treated. They may wait to have a bed assigned to them if it is determined that they require one. We know, of c ourse, tha t t he population of the prov ince is growing. We know that there are a higher number of v isits to emergency rooms here than, say, in the Calgary health region.

We are putting forward $41 million in our capital plan to repatriate some 170 beds that exist in hospitals throughout the Capital region, space that is now being freed up because of the consolidation of adminis- trative space in a central location, which is a step that the Calgary health authority took some number of years ago. Mr. Speaker, we are working with the Capital health authority to meet the real needs. The Health L ink l ine ha s reduced the num ber of unne cessary emergency visits each year by thousands. It takes 800,000 calls a year.

We know that that’s helping, but we also know that in moving these 170 beds forward, it’s not simply a matter of snapping your fingers and having all those beds and all the staff that is required to fill them. It requires careful planning on an ongoing basis to make sure that you not only open beds but that you actually have people who can staff those beds and look after the needs. It’s not simply a capital decision. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thank you.

How does the minister explain that in Alberta, the wealt hiest pr ovince in Can ada, Ed monton an d C algary ha ve some of the lowest acute care bed ratios for their population in the entire country? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, we have led this country in terms of the kinds of innovations that we have. We put enormous amounts of effort into things like designated assisted living, into long-term care. We make sure that acute care hospitals are reserved for those people who have the most urgent needs. But there are other ways of dealing with people in our health care system than hospitals.

I want the hon. member to understand that health care does not equal hospital care. There are many different facets of health care. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, it’s difficult to compare our province to ot her prov inces w hen the a verage age of our p opulation is generally younger than most other parts of the country; our needs are different. This kind of simple analysis does not lend itself to good policy direction. Dr. Taft: Well, will the minister commit here and now to providing the 700 ne w be ds that t he Capital he alth region ne eds f or t he Edmonton area? Mr. Mar: Over time, Mr.

Speaker, certainly, we’ll be looking at the real needs expressed by not only the Capital health region but health regions throughout the province. I think that it is important to know – and the hon. Minister of Infrastructure may wish to supplement – that we are investing billions of dollars into health care over the next five years. We have a significant plan, but again capital decisions are not the only

part in the planning for the delivery of health care. We also have to deal with the real and legitimate needs of operating costs associated with such facilities. Government Aircraft Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, before the Liberal opposition started asking questions about the government’s air fleet, the Minister of Infrastruc- ture said, “Those manifests are all available to the public, and they can be vi ewed at any time.” But since 10 a.m. Friday the govern- ment’s infamous code of silence has been imposed. For t his government democracy seems an inconvenience.

To the Minister of Infrastructure: what is the government hiding? Mr. L und: Mr. Sp eaker, we’re hiding absolutely n othing. A s a matter of fact, what was available before the Liberals started asking questions about the aircraft flight is still available. They’re available over a t t he department. I f those a ren’t good e nough, t hen the Liberals and others can use the FOIP process, and then they can get a hard copy of the logs that they’re requesting. There’s nothing to hide.

A s a matter of f act, I w ould cha llenge the m ember: w hy doesn’t he ask for a year, FOIP a year, then compare that with what has been available all the time and see if there are any discrepancies? I trust that there won’t be. Dr. Taft: Can the minister explain why on t his last Friday flight manifests suddenly became subject to the costly and bureaucratic freedom of information act when the day before they were available to anyone at any time? Mr. Lund: Mr. Speaker, that’s very easy to respond to. All of a sudden we became overburdened with requests. The media started asking.

The Liberals asked, and the Liberals, to put this in context, wanted to send over five researchers – we only have the capacity to handle two at a time – and they wanted to look at all of the manifests for over 10 years. The fact is there are some 1,200 manifests a year, and they wanted to go over 10 years, so that’s about 12,000 mani- fests that they were wanting to look at. If you break it down – and I don’t know what they’re looking for – I suspect that they couldn’t do more than 60 an hour. That’s one a minute. With the amount of information that’s on those, I suspect that that ’s a ll they c ould ha ndle.

I f y ou w orked that out , Mr . Speaker, that’s over 200 hours – 200 hours – that we would have to provide staff so that they could look at these manifests, and that’s just for one request. There were a number of other requests, Mr. Speaker, so we just simply couldn’t handle those kinds of requests, and 200 hours at,

May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1167 say, four hours a day – we’ve got to remember that we’ve got staff that are assigned other duties. They’re not just assigned to babysit the Liberals. So if you take four hours a day, that’s some 50 days. They can get it even faster through FOIP. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. Was it the minister who gave the order to classify this information, or, if it wasn’t, could he tell us who it was? Mr. L und: Mr. Spe aker, onc e again, w e are not c lassifying the information. They can get that information through FOIP, and I would urge them to do it. Mr.

Speaker, he commented about the cost, but I find that very interesting. They get a larg e sum of money for research. If they want to spend it that way, they’re welcome to it. But why should we in the department spend a large amount of taxpayers’ dollars in order to satisfy their witch hunt? Dr. Taft: To the Minister of Finance: given that Executive Council and Infrastructure alone spent $6 million on air travel last year, how much do all the other ministries spend? Mrs. Nelson: Well, Mr. Speaker, the hon.

Leader of the Opposition has had almost a daily occasion to be able to access that information through Co mmittee o f S upply to t he mi nistries as t hey co me forward, and I suggest that you direct it to each minister. Dr. Taft: To the Minister of Government Services: did the govern- ment consult the Privacy Commissioner before arbitrarily blocking access to flight information behind the freedom of information act? Mr. C outts: Mr. Spe aker, t here is a p rovision i n the FO IP A ct.

When the process is properly followed, if applicants have felt that they have not been served properly by the departments that they’re requesting information from, they have an opportunity to go to the Information and Privacy Commissioner and ask for a decision on the activities they have requested. That is part of the FOIP Act, and it is there for the use of any applicant who doesn’t feel that they have been properly served by the process. 1:50 Dr.

T aft: To the s ame minister: when will the g overnment s top stonewalling its democratic duty and simply post information about flights on a w eb site so that all A lbertans can s ee h ow their tax dollars are being spent? Mr. Coutts: Mr. Speaker, the Department of Government Services is responsible for the overall Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. F or that act, as it’s depicted amongst the various departments in this government, every single solitary department has a FOIP co-ordinator. They are trained by our department folks, and they follow the process that is outlined in the act.

The Minister of Infrastructure has s tood in this Hou se and has recommended that anyone wanting to get access to the s ummaries can do that. That’s the decision that has been made, and the process is there. That process is set out in the FOIP Act, and that department is familiar with that process, and we ask that those folks that have been asked to follow that process do so. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands, followed by the hon. Member for Clover Bar-Fort Saskatchewan. Beef Recovery Strategy Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Since the f irst case of BSE was found in Alberta, this government has adopted a strategy of simply hoping for the border to be reopened rather than working to off set the disastrous con sequences BSE has inflicted upon ra nchers. A fter the second B SE c ase was tr aced back to Alberta, the government promised it would not be caught off guard again and would develop a pla n for the beef industry in the event that the border did not open soon.

Eleven months later that so-called plan B, released Friday, contained few specifics and no hope for ranchers that the governm ent m ight pro tect them ag ainst packer monopolies if the U.S. market remains closed. My question is to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. Why has the minister reneged on her promise to produce a real contingency plan and instead has just produced a vague document that promises yet another plan sometime down the road? Mrs. McClellan: Mr.

Speaker, I find it interesting that the maybe deputy leader of the third party knows more about the beef industry than the some 65 people from the industry that sat around the table and drafted this document.

I would like to put on the record just a few names of the drafting team of t his d ocument tha t he holds in such low re gard: A rno Doerksen, chairma n, Alberta Be ef P roducers; Jeff W arrack, past chair of the A lberta Cattle Feeders’ Association; W illie V an Solkema, Canadian business manager, Cargill Foods; Bob Kalef, president a nd CEO, Centenn ial Foo ds; G ary Sarge nt, ge neral manager, Alberta Beef Producers; Brad McLeod, meat committee, Alberta Food Proc essors A ssociation; Glenn Br and, dir ector of marketing, B eef Inf ormation C entre; C olin Cam pbell, senior marketing and trad e of ficer, A griculture a nd A gri-Food Canada.

Then, Mr. Speaker, we do have Dale Engstrom, Rick Frederickson, Darcy Willis, Jackson Gardner, and Alan Ford from AAFRD. The majority of the people that made up this report, which I think is a fine document that actually talks about the issue, that actually puts it into context, that actually talks about a vision for the industry and guiding principles and strategic priorities, and goes into themes – Mr. Speaker, I know you want to give him an opportunity to ask the ne xt question, and I’d be happy to go over the rest of the document in the answer. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker. I would ask the minister: just how long will the border have to remain closed – and we all hope that it doesn’t remain closed – before this government will take concrete action to regulate the monopolistic practices of the American owned and controlled beef-packing indus try in this province? Mrs. McC lellan: Well, M r. Spe aker, t he one thing tha t t his government and this minister will continue to do is work with the industry and listen to the industry. We’ll continue to talk about the issues that are around the unfortunate continued closure.

However, we’re fairly optimistic that this situation will resolve itself in the near future, especially after the federal minister of agriculture, the Prime Minister, the U.S. Director of Agriculture, and the President of the United States had a conversation about this issue last week, and the American President, Mr. Bush, made it very clear that it is his desire and his government’s desire and the industry’s desire to see this solved as quickly as possible. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, given that the government’s Republican cousins in the United States may in fact be in serious trouble in this

Alberta Hansard May 3, 20041168 election and may not in fact be back after November, what will the government do if the border does not reopen? Mrs. McClellan: Well, Mr. Speaker, that’s a part of the family of cousins that I hadn’t really thought of, you know, being related to. Mr. Speaker, I want to go back to the document.

While it may not be what the learned member across the way wants, it is what the industry p layers – a nd I go ba ck a nd re peat t hat the re w ere 65 persons from the industry, from all aspects of the value chain that prepared this document and talked about market access and how to achieve it. There is a strategy in that. It includes harmonization of the end users. It talks about the theme of consumer confidence and the safety and quality of beef and a strategy to deal with that. Building capacity is about packing plants’ capability and advan- tage within the value chain.

That is about recognizing that we do need additional capacity even if the border does open, Mr. Speaker. What we really need the border open for is to create some arbitrage and some price determination in the marketplace. Then if you continue on in the document, which is extensive – and I know that we don’t have a lot of time – it does talk about short- term considerations. I would point the hon. member to page 10, and it is: “Border remains closed to live animals.” Slowly I will read it: (

a) situation, (

b) con sequence, (

c) responses and po ssible actions. Just read those sections. The Speaker: Perhaps the hon. Deputy Premier would be able to file the document a little later. The hon. Member for Clover Bar-Fort Saskatchewan, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Natural Gas Royalty Rates Mr. Lougheed: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For low natural gas prices and low oil prices the royalty rate return to Albertans is low. This is to allow the companies to recover their costs of exploration and development.

However, at a price of about $3 per gigajoule, which is much less than the current $7 per gigajoule, for the price of natural gas that is, the royalty rate for natural gas flattens out. After about $3 per gigajoule the rate is a constant 30 per cent no matter how high the price goes up. Since the companies are protected at lower prices, it seems that Albertans as the owners of the resource should receive higher royalty rates as the prices rise. Could the Minister of Energy explain why that’s not the case? Mr. Smith: Well, you know, Mr. Speaker, it’s a very good question.

In fact, I think that when the price-sensitive royalty model was first constructed, the con templation of $4, $ 5, $6, $7, $8, $9 gas was something that was extraordinarily infrequent. From that perspec- tive perhaps it is a good message to examine that royalty structure. From the perspectiv e of royalties bei ng structured so that th ey attract investment – and we all know that no job is created without adequate investment – this royalty structure in Alberta is such that it reflects the types of gas pools that we have throughout Alberta.

Alberta is characterized by a bountiful amount of gas but in difficult- to-find areas and with greater geo logical differences than what is usually encountered. So with that, Mr. Speaker, came the royalty structure that encouraged the private sector to find new and creative ways to find gas in this province. The second thing was, of course, that all that data is kept for a year at the EUB and then made public. So that has allowed us to have a very successful private sector. 2:00 Now, let me just briefly, Mr. Speaker, talk about: for every dollar the price of oil increases, the royalty change is about $65 million.

For e very 1 0 c ents i ncrease i n t he p rice o f n atural g as, A lberta collects a further $105 million in royalty. So what we do know is that we have a royalty structure that reflects some low productivity, high finding costs, and it’s created the biggest bonanza of drilling in the history of Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Lougheed: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We often hear of much higher royalty rates paid to other jurisdictions. How does Alberta’s royalty s hare compare to t he royalty s hare of, s ay, N orway or Alaska? Mr.

Smith: Well, the royalty discussion is always one that continues on an ongoing basis. For example, developing the oil sands created another opportunity to have e ven a different type of royalty struc- ture, so we put the generic royalty regime in place. That’s resulted in a great deal of investment, Mr. Speaker, and we’re seeing the resulting payback starting to accrue to Albertans, particularly in this high price environment.

Now, as co mpanies throughout the world look for co mpetitive ways to place their capital, they also look for the people who have the expertise to benchmark the toughness or the competitiveness of the royalty regime. W e use a coup le of groups . Dr. P edro van Meurs and Daniel Johnston are internationally recognized petroleum experts. They rate Alberta as one of the toughest fiscal regimes in the w orld in term s of the high sh are of non renewable resource revenue received by government: continuing to do a good job, Mr. Speaker, continuing to be competitive. Mr. L ougheed: Mr.

Spe aker, c ould t he minister e xplain how Alberta’s royalty rates compare to those of our adjacent provinces? Mr. Mason: How about Norway? Mr. Smith: Well, you know, Mr. Speaker, not only has this member mentioned a djacent pr ovinces, but a m ember of the thi rd pa rty chipped in, “How about Norway?” Well, Norway doesn’t deliver some 7 billio n to 9 bill ion dollars in transfer payments to ano ther jurisdiction each year. T his government do es.

T hese Albertans, through the prosperity of oil and gas exploration and oil and gas economic grants, participate in Confederation to the tune of 7 billion to 9 billion Canadian dollars per year. Is our royalty regime competitive? It’s being copied, it’s being imitated, a nd it ’s be ing dupli cated by Br itish Columbia a nd by Saskatchewan. As well, we continue to support the efforts of the Northwest Territories and Nova Scotia and Newfoundland to have their own royalty structure independent of the federal government. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon.

Member for Calgary-Montrose. Automobile Insurance Reforms Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In 2002, the latest year that statistics were available, bodily injury claims and adjustment expenses incurred totalled $725 million here in Alberta. My first question is to the Minister of Finance. What percentage of the total bodily inj ury c laim c osts will be e liminated in Alberta w ith the $4,000 cap on pain and suffering damage? Mrs. Nelson: Mr. Speaker, what I can tell the hon. member is that the changes to automobile insurance that have been put in place and

May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1169 are moving forward for implementation this summer in the province of Alberta will see roughly $200 million come out of the premium side of the equation, and that will be in the form of ret urns back, savings for Albertans. That’s being accomplished in good part by the cap that is going on plus the revamping of the structure. I t’s there to give Albertans an accessible a nd a ffordable automobile insurance package. The exact percentage: I don’t have that number with me, but we can get it. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Ma cDonald: Thank yo u, M r. S peaker.

Again t o t he s ame minister: given that there were 19,190 c laims in 2002 for bodi ly injury in Alb erta, p rivate p assenger, h ow m any of t hese c laims would now be included in the $4,000 cap on pain and suffering? Mrs. Nelson: Well, that would be something to anticipate, and I can’t give him that number, Mr. Speaker. Mr. MacDonald: Again, Mr.

Speaker, to the same minister: if we’re going to see roughly $200 million in savings, if that is part of the percentage of the total loss costs, how will this be affected for total loss co sts fo r al l a uto i nsurance co verages co mbined wh en we change in Alberta and go to the $4,000 cap on pain and suffering? Where will the $200 million come in? Mrs. Nelson: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the structure that we’re bringing forward deals with the compulsory automobile insurance t hat we require through law in this province, so when the hon. member talks about all automobile insurance being covered under th is c hange, we’re look ing a t the compulsory a utomobile ins urance in the province, which is the PL/PD that has to be in place for every person that operates a motorized vehicle in the province. Now, as we move into the new structure, we anticipate that $200 million will come out of the system on the premium side, and of course then that is offset by a balancing on the benefit.

Clearly, the cap should deal with the claims and actually be beneficial for people, because part of the process will be to get peop le into treatment as quickly as possible and try and get them back to a healthy position as quic kly as poss ible w ithout g oing thr ough a long proc ess of debate between insurance companies and lawyers, et cetera. We expect that this will be beneficial all the way around for the consumer of automobile insurance and that it will come into effect this summer.

To give you an idea of what will be and what is as we go through this, I think you’ll see the benefits to Albertans quite clearly. It has been a very long process, Mr. Speaker, to get to this point of implementation, and we’re almost there. I hope that the hon. member will bear with us as we go through these next six weeks of finalizing regulations. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Montrose, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Repeat Impaired Driving Offences Mr. Pham: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In memory of loved ones lost to drunk drivers, 90 white crosses were carried through the streets of Edmonton y esterday. T he 90 c rosses represent t he number of Albertans killed each year in drunk driving accidents. In some of these incidents the driver had previously had multiple convictions for impaired driving, which proves that more needs to be done to deal with repeat offenders. My question today is to the Minister of Justice. Can the minister tell the House what his ministry is doing to get these killers off our roads? The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr.

Hancock: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The issue of impaired driving is one th at we take very, v ery s eriously. I ’ve had the opportunity to work with the Minister of Transportation and with the Solicitor General with respect to finding better ways to deal with not just traffic safety, not just impaired driving but also with people who have numerous convictions for i mpaired dri ving. I t’s very, ve ry important. As the hon. member has indicated, 90 people each year are killed by impaired driving. It’s criminal. It has to be treated as criminal.

I t ma y e ven be w orse than some of the oth er criminal activity which hurt s or kills peo ple in ou r communities, because people ought to feel safe on our streets, and they don’t even see it coming. Our prosecutors have been instructed to monitor those high-profile cases closely. We’ve appointed a specific prosecutor to monitor the situation and to work with other prosecutors across the province to identify cases where there have been multiple convictions.

If a person has been identified as a chronic drunk driver, we will now be attempting to secure the maximum protection for society by seeking s ubstantial s entences inc luding da ngerous of fender a nd long-term offender status. This is important, Mr. Speaker, because long-term and da ngerous offender designations carry some of the most severe consequences in the Criminal Code. These designations will he lp us to take people out o f t he c ommunity w ho a re not learning their lessons about the safety of the community.

It’s important to understand that applications for long-term and dangerous offender status can only be used in the most serious of cases. It w ould in volve a repe at i mpaired dr iver who’s been convicted of an offence that has caused death or bodily harm and where it’s been established that the communities would not other- wise be adequately protected from the offender. 2:10 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Pham: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given the minister’s answer, do we have to wait until somebody is hurt or injured or killed before we can take action against these people? Mr. H ancock: Well, Mr.

Spe aker, i n te rms of the long -term offender or d angerous off ender status, t here does have to b e a conviction for a crime which involves a serious injury or death, so impaired driving causing death or impaired driving causing serious injury. However, it doesn’t stop there. We will be toughening up on all r epeat drunk dri ving of fences, s uch as s eeking m ore s erious penalties for repeat drunken drivers, even those who do not fit the criteria for long-term or dangerous offender status.

We’ll be working with police services to identify and effectively prosecute chronic drunk drivers and make sure that those prosecu- tions are better co-ordinated, emphasizing in court the

section of the Criminal Code that requires a sentencing judge to consider severe alcohol impairment as an aggravating factor in sentencing. We’ll be continuing, Mr. Speaker, with the efforts that we have taken – Alberta has taken a leadership position in conjunction with British Columbia, Ma nitoba, O ntario, N ova Scotia, a nd m ore provinces are getting on board all the time – to have the Crim inal Code sections with respect to conditional sentences changed so that conditional sentences cannot be used in areas of serious and violent crime, including impaired driving causing death and serious injury.

Alberta Hansard May 3, 20041170 The Speaker: The hon. member? The hon. Me mber for E dmonton-Centre, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-West. Midwifery Services Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Midwives could help ease the pressure of physician shortages caused for a number of commu- nities that don’t have a practising obstetrician. This government’s failure t o pa y midwives to deliver ba bies is forcing midwives to return to nursing or leave the province. My questions are to the Minister of Health and Wellness.

In recognition of International Midwives D ay c ould t he minister e xplain w hy thi s government won’t publicly fund midwifery, as some other provinces already do? Mr. Ma r: Mr. Sp eaker, it’s true that m idwives ca n pro vide an important service. Re grettably, there are not that many of t hem. There are on my last count I believe 17 midwives in the province. There are a number of them that are working within regional health authorities, that are working in collaboration and co-operation with physicians.

We recognize that midwives are competent to deal with low-risk births and that it makes some sense to involve them. We think, Mr. Speaker, t hat thr ough our local pri mary c are initiatives, w here physicians are provid ed certain am ounts of m oney to hire ot her health care professionals to work within a local primary care team, there may be an opportunity for midwives and other health profes- sionals to be practising much more within the scope of their practice. We have not yet seen any of the LPCIs come forward – it would be premature to expect them to – but over time, Mr.

Speaker, I think that midwives, like many other health professionals, will be able to demonstrate the value of what they can provide to a multidisciplinary team in providing primary health care, including matters related to the competencies that exist within the profession of being a midwife. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Bla keman: Thank you. T o th e sa me m inister: w hy m ust midwives pay the first $5,000 of their liability insurance before the government steps in while physicians must only pay the first $1,000? Mr. Mar: Mr.

Speaker, I can correct myself at some later juncture if I’m incorrect, but to the best of my recollection we cover approxi- mately $ 10,000, in ro und nu mbers, per m idwife for th eir profes- sional liability insurance. I think that that is a significant contribu- tion on the part of the provincial government. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Thank you.

Again to the same minister: well, given that 10 years ago we had 150 midwives – now we’re down to 17 – the governmen t has had a w orking group on fund ing m idwives, which re ported a y ear a go, a nd ther e have bee n num erous pilot projects that have and continue to be run, why does the government continue to delay, deny, and defer? What’s the problem? Mr. Mar: Mr.

Speaker, I refer the hon. member to review the Blues of my first response to her initial question, and that is that we are providing an opportunity for all health professionals to work to the much fuller scope of their practices and their competencies. We recognize what competencies are within the profession of midwifery, and we think that through our local primary care initiatives there will be opportunities for midwives to practise in that area if that’s what they choose. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-West, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods.

Crossborder Sale of Prescription Drugs Ms Kryczka: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Many of my constituents and friends are increasingly concerned abo ut crossborder Internet sales of Canadian drug supplies to th e United States. A research organization, the Pharmacy Alliance for Canadians, estimates that Alberta is leading Canada with the highest growth rate, 216 per cent, of Int ernet s ales of pha rmaceutical produc ts to Americans. T he Alliance r epresents l ocal c ompanies s uch a s C anada S afeway, Shoppers Drug Mart, and London Drugs.

They say that the increase in crossborder pharmacy sales is already causing prescription drug shortages at the pharmacy level in some provinces such as Manitoba, where crossborder drug sales first began. I n fact, 79 per cent of pharmacists the re re port drug s hortages. M y que stion i s to t he Minister of Health and W ellness. Are crossborder drug s ales affecting the supply of prescription drugs in Alberta? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Mar: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. S ir, the sale of prescription drugs by Canadian distance pharmacies to American consumers has been occurring for some time.

By last count I’ve been advised that there are some 100 such distance pharmacies operating w ithin Canada that qu ite likely are selling pha rmaceuticals to A merican customers. T he largest number of such distance pharmacies, I’m advised, are in the province of Manitoba. While the Pharmacy Alliance for Canadians does report that some drugs are in short supply, we do not have any information to support that claim here in the province of Alberta. W e are continuing to monitor it, Mr. Sp eaker.

My department informs me, again, that there’s no evidence that crossborder sales of prescription drugs are resulting in a shortage of such drugs being available to Albertans, nor is there a ny evidence to suggest that prices are increasing as a result of this activity going on. Ms K ryczka: My f irst supp lemental qu estion is to the sam e minister. Given that the alliance does believe that recent prescrip- tion drug prices a re dir ectly due to the ri sing c rossborder drug business, does the minister have a plan to protect Albertans from prescription drug shortages and drug price inflation? Mr. Mar: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I think that there has been a recogni- tion of this issue not only by the Department of Health and Wellness here in the province of Alberta but really across Canada. I think it would be important to recognize that even if an individual province within this country were to take action against distance pharmacies or Internet drug sales, as they’re sometimes referred to, really all that would do would be to move the industry to another province. Last De cember, I c an advise this H ouse, a ll provincial a nd territorial deputy ministers of heal th identified Internet ph armacy sales as a potential issue.

This province is participating in a Canada- wide review to assess the scope and impact of distance pharmacy or Internet pha rmacy s ales on publ ic he alth dr ug s upplies. W e’ll continue to work prov incially w ith our ow n A lberta Co llege of Pharmacists and other stakeholders to monitor this issue. We will take whatever steps are necessary in the event that there is a legitimate issue as alleged by the Pharmacy Alliance, but again, Mr. Speaker, there is no such evidence available at this time. The Speaker: The hon. member?

May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1171 The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods, fo llowed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Postsecondary Tuition Fees Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. T he president of the stu- dents’ union at the University of Alberta has taken issue . . . [A loud thumping sound was heard] Dr. Taylor: I can hear your heart, Don. Dr. Massey: At least I have one. The Speaker: Hon. member, there seems to be something malfunc- tioning with the system that we have. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

T he president of the stu- dents’ union at the University of Alberta has taken issue with the answers given in this House by the Minister of Learning with respect to tuition. My questions are to the Minister of Learning. Why did the minister characterize the CPI plus 2 per cent tuition solution as the students’ choice when what they really wanted was a tui tion freeze? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, the CPI plus 2 came in at discussions with the students’ unions. It was suggested and recommended by one of the pre sidents of a s tudents’ union i n Albe rta. I t w as not the students’ union from the U of A. 2:20 Dr.

Massey: To the same minister: why did t he minister tell the House that “student debt in Alberta has consistently gone down” when student debt has increased substantially during the 1990s? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, student debt has been going down. What we’ve seen is that with the increasing amount of student loans, the increasing loan grants that are given to the students presently in Alberta, w ith the ful l s tudent l oan they w ill ha ve approximately $5,000 to pay back on a loan limit of $11,600. Dr. Massey: Again to the same minister, Mr.

Speaker: why does the minister persist in the myth that there’s a 30 per cent cap on tuition when as soon as an institution hits the 30 per cent, that cap disap- pears? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, in Alberta right now the main universities are sitting at – approximately 24 t o 25 pe r cent of the expenses is now tuition. They have the ability to go to 30 per cent. They raise their tuition by approximately $275 to $280 per year in a prescribed formula that is included in the legislation. Once they reach 30 per cent, the increase to tuition is not as much as it is now.

We currently have approximately three or four institutions around the province who have hit 30 per cent, and the reason they have hit 30 per cent, Mr. Speaker, is because they have decreased expenses. It’s very simple. It’s a very simple numerator/denominator issue, and the expenses have gone down. The University of Lethbridge, for example, is sitting at I believe $4,100 for tuition, which is significantly lower than the $4,400 or $4,500 at the University of Calgary and the University of Alberta.

Because of the tuition policy they were not allowed to increase their tuition and indeed had to freeze it because of that 30 per cent policy. So what you see, Mr. Speaker, is that despite the fact that they’re at 30 per cent, their tuition is still substanti ally lower than any place else. The Lethbridge Community College had frozen their tuition for three years, which put their tuition considerably lower than any place else. W hy did this occur? This occurred simply because they’re being v ery e fficient i n w hat the y do. They’re lowering the ir expenses.

T heir expenses are increasing at a lower rate than any other institution in Alberta. Those are the kinds of practices, Mr. Speaker, that we should encourage, and indeed we do. They still have the ability to increase once they hit 30 per cent. They can go to a cost of living plus 2. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Wainwright. Direct Energy Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The more the fine print of the ATCO/Direct Energy deal is examined, the motive becomes obvious that this is a bad deal designed to rip off ATCO’s 1 million natural gas and electricity customers. Direct Energy isn’t even doing it s own billin g but i s contracting these serv ices back to an AT CO subsidiary called ATCO I-Tek. Y et tha nks to this government’s wrong-headed deregulation polic y, Direct Energy gets to pick the pockets of ATCO’s gas and electricity customers to the tune of $42 million a year. My que stion i s to t he Minister of G overnment Services.

Why are the minister and his toothless Utilities Consumer Advocate failing to protect Albertans by allowing this $42 million a year rip-off of gas and electricity customers? Mr. Coutts: Well, Mr. Speaker, this whole issue of the ATCO and Direct sale came up well before the Utilities Consumer Advocate was put in place. The Utilities Consumer Advocate opened up its doors in November of 2003, and over that time we have been dealing with intervention pol icies with the E UB, w hich w as pa rt of our mandate in the first place.

This whole deal with ATCO and Direct came up well before the advocate’s office was put in place. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that ATCO I-Tek has announced that it’s creating 180 new positions to carry out the Direct Energy c ontract, w hy a re A TCO’s g as a nd e lectricity c ustomers being a sked t o p ay f or t he a dditional pr ivate-sector bu reaucracy that’s been created as a result of the Direct Energy deal? Mr. Coutts: Well, Mr. Speaker, I j ust want to make a comment about the role of the advocate.

One of his key duties is to provide representation on consumer issues in front of the EUB. The other thing i s that the a dvocate is a lso the re to help c onsumers help themselves, and the other thing that the advocate does is make sure that if a consumer has difficulty with a company in terms of paying a bill, wh ether the inf ormation t hat is on t he bill is a ccurate, or correct, or there needs to be an understanding of the information that is on t he bill, he will act on be half of that consumer to make the company’s customer service more respons ive to the needs of the consumer.

In this particular case, ATCO and Direct have struck an arrange- ment b y w hich t hey m ake s ure t hat t heir c ustomer s ervice w ill perform on behalf of the consumers, and if consumers have diffi- culty u nderstanding that pro cess, they ca n call the consumer advocate. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pa nnu: Thank y ou, M r. Sp eaker. Will th e m inister t ake

Alberta Hansard May 3, 20041172 advantage of the opportunity afforded by Direct Energy’s appear- ance before a Tory standing committee meeting this afternoon to ask them some tough questions about why Albertans are $42 million worse off as a result of this obviously flawed deal? Mr. Coutts: Mr. Speaker, the consumer advocate of this province is a v ery ha rd-working, k nowledgeable indi vidual w ho is v ery dedicated to the job . . . [i nterjection] Yes, that’s right. He is an individual with the utmost integrity, and he does not shirk any of his duties. I am quite upset by the line of questioning.

This is twice in this A ssembly t hat t he ho n. m ember ha s c alled m y c onsumer advocate, m y de puty m inister, toothless. H e is a nything but toothless. He i s acting on behalf of consumers of this province in many, many ways, and it’s a very, very effective tool for consumers in this province. He attends all of the meetings that he can possibly attend all across this province and in this building, and that deputy minister, consumer advocate, attends those kinds of meetings because those are the stakeholders that he deals with.

He takes that responsibility very, very carefully, and he goes to all of the meetings that they go to and works very, very closely with Direct and ATCO as well as all other companies in the province. Our advocate is anything but toothless. The Minister of Energy may want to add to that. Mr. Smith: Mr. Speaker, it’s always a pleasure to rise and correct the third party’s errors, and some of those errors are important to correct.

The EUB has ruled categ orically that all start- up costs m ust remain with the shareholder, meaning tha t t hese costs cannot be passed on t o the e lectricity a nd the na tural g as c onsumer. T his member knows exactly what the EUB ruled on. He knows that the EUB has said: no recovery of the $90 million. What they have said is that 10 cents a day is added to the natural gas bill so that other call centres’ bil ling ope rations can be put in pl ace and the w ay to purchase natural gas in Alberta can lead to further efficiencies and better competition. The electricity customers of ATCO do not pay a nickel more.

In conclusion, had this company not contracted with ATCO, not created these 200 new jobs, he’d have been the first guy to stand up and say: they’re off-shoring; they’re outsourcing; jobs are leaving Alberta. Jobs are staying in A lberta. You sh ould sup port this. Come on. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wainwright. Second-language Instruction Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Learning has indi cated tha t i t will be come mandatory for e very student i n grade 4 through grade 9 in 2005 a nd 2006 t o learn a second lan- guage.

Many of my constituents have called to express appreciation for such a plan but have serious concerns about the implementation and logistics of such a policy. My first question to the Minister of Learning: where will small rural and remote schools who already have challenges finding and retaining qualified staff such as speech pathologists and math 9 teachers find the resources to set up video conferencing or hire a second-language teacher to deliver such a policy? Dr. Oberg: Mr.

Speaker, included in the implementation plan for second languages is the whole ide a of e xpanding the num ber of teachers that have second-language skills. So, first of all, what we have done is we’ve put in bursaries and scholarships to the universi- ties.

I ’ve a lso inc luded s econd la nguages in what are called the KSAs, which list the knowledge, skills, and attributes that students are required to have when they graduate from the universities with a teaching degree. 2:30 Directly to answer the hon. member’s question, we are looking at ways to e nsure that ther e are video c onferencing s uites in e very school in A lberta. We are very close to put ting out RFPs to that effect. We have established standards to ensure that they’re there. So, Mr. Speaker, I certainly see the day very soon when there will be video conferencing suites in every school.

The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My second question, my first supplemental: how will home-schooled students in rural and remote schools receive such services? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, one of the w ays that students have been learning second languages for a long time is over computers. If, for example, the home-schoolers choose to home-school their children, there will be courses that are available over the Internet. Of course, it is going to require that they have a computer though, and that’s something that they’re going to have to do. Mr. Griffiths: My final supplemental, M r.

Speaker, to the same minister: what will be removed from an already full curriculum to make room for this mandatory second-language instruction? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, currently there’s about 15 per cent of the curriculum that is not spoken for. There is 85 per cent that has all the social studies, language, mathematics, art, and music, things like that, so th ere’s about 15 per ce nt o pen. Ou r estim ates are that second languages will take about 95 hours a year, or roughly 30 minutes a d ay, so t here i s t he 1 0 p er ce nt t here. Th ere i s t ime available for that.

One of the oth er areas that we’re looking at is the relationship between second l anguages and English language arts. C ertainly, there is a very intimate relationsh ip b etween learning anoth er language and learning language arts. So we’re taking a look at that. Quite simply, Mr. Speaker, that’s one of the reasons why it isn’t going in this September. We have the curriculums in place, but there is going to have to be some study, and there is room in the curriculum for this.

It’s a matter of how we do it and how we do it in the best possible fashion. head: Recogni tions The Speaker: Hon. members, in a few seconds from now I’ll call upon the first of seven members to participate. [The Deputy Speaker in the chair] Louis and Ruth Maria Adria Mr. Yankowsky: Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Louis and Ruth Maria Adria, who e stablished Elder Advocates of Alberta in the early 199 0s. A script ure vers e that appears on all their letters, posters, and research states: “Rise in the presence of the aged, and honour the face of the old man.” Leviticus 19:32.

Indeed, this is what Louis and Ruth Maria are doing as they continue to advocate for a very vulnerable segment of our society, the frail elderly. The Adrias’ mission is to bring mercy and compassion to our sick

May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1173 and helpless elderly and bring public awareness to the situation frail elderly sometimes find themselves in. Sometimes they are criticized for the length and extent of their zeal, and sometimes they get into trouble for their tactics, but, Mr. Speaker, they cannot be criticized and indeed should be commended for their heart and their dedication to a cause which is very important. May we all rise in the presence of the aged. God bless you. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for West Yellowhead. Floyd McLennan Mr. Strang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to recognize Mr.

Floyd McLennan, who passed away on April 24, 2004. Floyd was the mayor of Grande Cache until his passing, and he was a personal friend of m ine f or ov er 20 y ears. F loyd, a t rue friend, a tr ue champion of Grande Cache, served as councillor since 1982 and as its mayor since 1990. As mayor Floyd always put the needs of the community ahead of his own, and you could see that by the time and commitment he devoted to the community projects and programs.

He was an avid supporter of the Royal Canadian Legion, the Grande Cache Golf and Country Club, and seniors organizations, and he was always willing to participate in various charity fundraisers. He was instrumental in laying the groundwork for the seniors’ complex in Grande Cache, which should be starting construction this year. The town and all who knew Floyd will miss him, his wise counsel, his k een s ense of wit. Th e community a nd I offer our heartfelt condolences to Gudrun, Stuart, Shauna, Scott, and their families. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Edmonton Folk Music Festival Mr.

Ma cDonald: I rise to recognize the 25th anniversary of the Edmonton Folk Music Festival. The folk festival began in 1980 in Gold Bar park as the vision of Don Whelan. With his vision and the energy of 300 volunteers this event has grown and matured into one of the world’s leading folk festivals. T he four-day f estival now makes its home in Gallagher park. The park is a wonderful outdoor venue, offering a natural amphitheatre in pristine parkland with an outstanding view of the beautiful Edmonton skyline.

Today over 1,800 volunteers work very hard in many capacities to ensure the smooth operation of this vast undertaking. The values of t he folk f estival inc lude: t o prov ide a qua lity, di verse m usic program that is accessible to all, to develop Alberta artists, and to increase the awareness of f olk m usic. Every y ear this f estival showcases some of the world’s best musicians, including outstand- ing Ca nadian talent. T he folk festival of fers a m osaic of music delivered in the finest tradition of Celtic, bluegrass, blues, gospel, roots, world beat, and country music for the enjoyment of all. Thank you.

The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. International Business Round-table Mr. Cao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last Friday morning in Calgary the Mini ster of Int ernational a nd Int ergovernmental R elations organized a session where the Alberta government briefed foreign diplomatic c orps f rom all over the w orld abou t A lberta. T hese diplomats were very appreciative and pointed out that Alberta is the only jurisdiction that does such a briefing. In t he afternoon t he d iplomatic c orps were invited to join the Alberta international business round-table discussion.

This round- table was org anized b y the Mini stry of Ec onomic D evelopment, chaired by the Minister of Economic Development and co-chaired by myself and the hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. To this round-table we invited over 30 immigrants who are in business and have cultural connections in other countries. T he idea is to include them and get them involved in international busin ess development for Alberta. New Canadian citizens bring with them valuable hidden assets; that is, their p ersonal connections in other countries.

I believe that Alberta needs to capitalize on this network- ing asset in our global economic development and competition. Thank you. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for St. Albert. St. Albert Saints Hockey Team Mrs. O’Neill: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to recognize all that the St. A lbert Saints hoc key te am did for our c ommunity of St. Albert.

The owners, organizers, supporters, volunteers, and players themselves have giv en us entertainme nt for our spo rting f ans, economic encouragement for our businesses and service industry, joy to the families who billeted out-of-town players, and, of course, pride and provincial sporting identity for all our citizens. As the Member of this Legislative Assembly for the constituency of St. Albert I wish to express my personal thanks to our exciting St. Albert Saints and my sorrow in seeing the club leave my commu- nity. T o the Saints, formerly known as the St.

Albert Saints, you have been a great and exciting organization in our community. I wish you well in your new home facility in Spruce Grove. Thanks for the memories. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. May Day Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. May 1 commem- orates the historic struggle of working people throughout the world. The holiday began in the 1880s in the United Stated with the fight for an eight-ho ur workday.

In 18 84 the Federation of Organized Trades a nd La bour U nions pa ssed a resolution stating tha t e ight hours should constitute a legal day’s work from and after May 1, 1886. During a strike to achieve this goal, police attacked workers from the McCormic k harv ester company, k illing six. W e m ust recognize and commemorate M ay Day not onl y for its histo rical significance b ut also as a time to organize a round issues of vital importance to working people today.

On M ay 1 wo rking p eople a nd t heir f amilies mar ched d own Whyte Avenue to celebrate May Day and to kick off the May Week Labour A rts Fe stival. T his f estival bri ngs together t he labour movement and artists to celebrate the contribution of workers to our economy, culture, and society. I salute the labour movement in Alberta and its continuing efforts to win a better life for working people. 2:40 Irene Besse Mr. Lord: Mr. Speaker, today I r ise to recognize an outstanding Calgarian f or s pearheading a m ajor f undraising dri ve for t he Children’s hospital in Calgary-Currie.

It’s just one of dozens of such projects for this incredible lady who has also just finished a $4.6 million project to provide 90 new Steinway pianos to the University of Calgary. Her name is Irene Besse. She is a household name in Calgary and even internationally, and in fact her name is in many households on pianos purchased from Irene Besse Keyboards, widely recognized as

Alberta Hansard May 3, 20041174 the be st e quipped, or ganized, a nd de signed bus iness a nd pe rfor- mance facility of its kind in North America. Winner o f so many awards I can’t even begin to list them all, she’s an Alberta woman entrepreneur of the year lifetime achieve- ment award winner, a Pinnacle winner, a woman of vision winner, was featured on the Women’s Television Network. It just goes on and on.

S ports organist for the Calgary Flames, the Cannons, the Stampeders, first organist in the world to provide live organ music at the Winter Olympics figure skating and hockey, she started the tradition which continues to this day. I w as f ortunate, i ndeed, t o w ork w ith Irene to bring b ack the carillon bells in downtown Calgary, Mr. Speaker, so I understand completely why she won the award for best in sheer positive energy at the SabreTEC best in business awards. Congratulations, Irene, and keep up all that incredible work. head: Pre senting Pet itions The Deputy Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am presenting a petition signed by 120 A lbertans petitioning the Legislative A ssembly to “urge the Government of Alberta to return to a regulated electricity system, reduce power bills, and develop a program to assist Alber- tans in improving energy efficiency.” [The Speaker in the chair] head: Tabling Return s and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Airdrie-Rocky View. Ms Haley: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

On behalf of the Deputy Premier and Min ister of A griculture, Fo od and Rural Development I’d like to table Alberta Beef – Focus on the Future that she referenced in her answer today. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ve got three tablings today. The first one is an A TCO/Direct Energy joint news release dated April 29, 2004, regarding their long-term contract. The second tabling, Mr.

Speaker, is a letter dated April 29, 2004, to the government by Colleen Smith of the triparish peace a nd justice m inistry, w ritten o n beh alf o f o ver 14, 000 parish ioners, asking the government of Alberta to increase the minimum wage so that people working on it can make a living wage. The third tabling, Mr. Speaker, is another letter, dated April 27, again addressed to the government, by Aline McMillan, chair, social justice ministry of St. Agnes, St. Anthony, and St. Thomas More Roman Catholic churches.

This letter is written on behalf of, again, more than 14,000 parishioners who are asking the Premier and the government to recognize the dignity of work and raise the minimum wage. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m rising to table a copy of the May Week Labour Arts Festival event calendar. From April 28 to May 9 Edmontonians will be taking

part in f ilm view- ings, poetry readings, and other activities to celebrate the numerous contributions and sacrifices made every day by working people. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings today. The first is f rom constitu ent Coll een Babiuk-Ilkiw, ou tlining her mother’s journey in trying to beat cancer, including her battle for a diagnosis and battle for treatment.

The second tabling is from a second constituent, Diane Oxenford, asking w hy the pro vincial g overnment is ig noring the origin al historic site of Ros sdale f lats a nd a sking f or c onsideration t o improve the entrance to the capital city and the front garden of the Legislature, t hat be ing Q ueen El izabeth Par k Roa d, W alterdale bridge, the Terrace Building, and the Rossdale industrial site. Thank you. head: Tabl ings t o the Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following document was deposited with the office of the Clerk on behalf of the hon. Mr.

Mar, Minister of Health and Wellness: pursuant to the Public Health Act, Public Health Appeal Board annual report 2003. head: Stat ement by the Speake r Calendar of Special Events The Speaker: Hon. members, now that we’ve arrived in the month of May, let me just advise of the following commemorative days and weeks tha t a re a vailable in the m onth of Ma y.

M ay is Cy stic Fibrosis Month, Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month, Medic-Alert Month, Huntington Disease Awareness Month, Hearing Awareness Month, Speech a nd H earing A wareness Month, Motor cycle and Bicycle Safety Awareness Month, Asian Pacific Heritage Month, Red Shie ld A ppeal Mont h, C hild Find’s Green Ribbon of H ope campaign, Light the Way Home campaign. Now, various weeks or days within the month of May. April 1 to May 30 are Girl Guides sandwich cookie weeks. April 19 to May 19 is National P hysiotherapy Mon th. May 1 to May 7 is National Summer Safety Week.

May 2 to 8 is North American Occupational Safety and Health Week. May 2 to May 8 is Drinking Water Week. May 2 to May 8 is also National Forest Week, as it is the Intern a- tional Composting Awareness Week, as it is Emergency Prepared- ness Week. May 2 to May 11 is Information Technology Week. Today, May 3, is World Press Freedom Day. May 3 to May 9 is Mental Health Week. May 3 to May 9 is National Hospice Palliative Care Week. M ay 3 t o May 9 i s Respect for Law Week. M ay 4, tomorrow, is World Asthma Day. May 7 to 9 are multiple sclerosis carnation campaign days. May 8 is the World Red Cross Day.

May 8 is a lso the N on-Violence O ptimist D ay. M ay 8 t o Ma y 15 i s Alberta Crime Prevention Week. May 9 is Mother’s Day. May 9 to May 15 is Na tional P olice Week. May 10 to May 16 is National Nursing Week, as it is also National Mining Week. May 12 is International Nurses Day. May 12 is a lso Ca nada H ealth Day. M ay 15 i s International D ay of Families. May 16 t o M ay 22 i s National I mmunization W eek, a s it is Intergenerational Wee k, as it is E mergency Medical Servic es Awareness Week, as it is National Dog Bite Prevention Week. May 17 is also World Telecommunication Day.

International Museums Day is on May 18. May 21 to May 27 is National Road Safety Week. May 22 to May 28 is Safe Boating Week. May 22 is Raise the Flag Day, as it also is International Day for Biological Diversity. M ay 24 i s Victoria Day. May 25 is National Missing Children’s Day. May 25 to May 28 is Aboriginal Awareness Week. May 25 t o June 1 is Week of Solidarity with the Peoples of Non-Self-Governing Territories.

May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1175 May 29 is schizophrenia Walk for Hope day. May 30 is World Partnership Walk day. May 30 to June 5 is Canadian Environment Week, as it also is National Access Awareness Week, as it also is National Sun Awareness Week. May 31 is the World No-Tobacco Day. head: Orders of the Day head: Written Questions The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pr oper notice having been given on Thursday, April 29, it’s now my pleasure to move that written questions appearing on t oday’s Order Paper do stand and retain their places. [Motion carried] head: Motions for Returns The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Proper notice having been gi ven o n Th ursday, Ap ril 2 9, o r p erhaps e arlier, i t’s my pleasure to move that motions for returns appearing on today’s Order Paper do stand and retain their places with the exception of motions for returns 40, 41, 42, 44 through 49, 52, 53, 55 through 62, 64, 66, 69 through 83, 88 through 105, 108 through 123, 128, 134 through 143, 146 through 160, 162, 164 through 168, 174 through 180, 183 through 189, 197, and 200 through 205. [Motion carried] The Clerk Assistant: Motion for a Return 40, Ms Carlson. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. 2:50 Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie, there seems to be a malfunctioning going on at some of the desks. Would the hon. member mind moving to perhaps the place where the hon. Member for Edmonton-Glengarry is. Mr. Smith: Come on over. Move to the right. One more. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. No, this is far enough right for me. Thanks, fellas. Business Credit Card Statements for Environment Department M40.

Ms Carlson moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a re turn showing a ll monthly bus iness c redit card statements for the fiscal year 2002-2003 issued to the deputy minister, all assistant deputy ministers, executive directors, directors, branch heads, managers, and unit leaders for the Department of Environment. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’ve already indicated previously but I’ll indicate it again that there are likely going to be a number of similarly worded motions for returns which at this stage are not required to be accepted, so we will be rejecting them because they have in fact been, for the most part at least, covered by MR 24 as amended, which in fact opened up all of the issues of business credit card statements for the year in question that were issued to deputy ministers, assistant deputy ministers, executive directors, and so on within the government of Alberta.

So that will affect a ll ministries, and as such MR 40 is going to be rejected on that basis since it is perfunctory in nature at this stage. The Speaker: The hon. Opposition House Leader. Ms Blakeman: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I disagree with the Government House Leader that it is perfunctory at this point. The reason that the opposition submits the same question for a number of different ministries is that history has taught us to do this.

In the past where we asked for aggregate amounts, we would get a response that did not allow us to do accurate comparisons ministry to ministry, for example, because we just weren’t given information that allowed us to do that kind of comparison. So history taught us to put in a question for each ministry. Despite having had Motion for a Return 24 passed, we are not getting the information that we sought. We are missing a level of detail that allows the Official Opposition to be accurate in what it does with that information.

I’ve heard the members of the govern- ment c omplain i n the pa st tha t, you k now, w e were unfairly extrapolating, that we were moving the numbers around unfairly, that we weren’t giving an accurate portrayal of things, and frankly – what’s the computer phrase? – garbage in, garbage out. If we’re not given good information to begin with, it’s very difficult for us to do a good job coming back out again. We ha ve requested the inf ormation f rom the D epartment of Environment because we would like to see that information.

There are a couple of problems that we had with Motion for a Return 24, and they c arry the mselves forward int o Moti on f or a Re turn 40. That is, we asked for the monthly business credit card statements, actually a copy of the statement. What we’re going to be given is a retyping, a statement of credit card expenses, which is a difference. There’s been no explanatio n t hat w e’ve rece ived for w hy that difference is given, why the need to retype what’s on those credit card statements. Is there something being omitted there?

We don’t know that, and that may cause us problems in the future when people say: well, you should have known. Well, how? We weren’t given the original documentation, which is what we were seeking here. The other change that ha ppened here is it doe sn’t allow us to understand wh ere we d idn’t ge t t he s ame i nformation fro m a department. S o, f or e xample, the D epartment of Env ironment submits, and they give information into the aggregate for the deputy minister but no assistant deputy ministers. Why? Well, they didn’t have credit card expenses.

But we’re not given that information in the aggregate, so we now will be doing inaccurate comparisons, or we could be put in that position. We’re not given the detail when it comes t hrough t hat t ells u s t hat we d idn’t ge t ex actly th e s ame format, a grid if you will, from all departments. I w ould ur ge, e ven gi ven Motion f or a Re turn 24, t hat the members of the House understand the difference in the level of detail that the Official Opposition has asked for and what is n ow being given in, sort of, much vaguer terms, the information diffused out and the detail removed.

I would urge all members of the House to vote in favour of Motion for a Return 40. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie to close the debate.

Alberta Hansard May 3, 20041176 Ms Carlson: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I listened to what the deputy House leader had to say last week about Motion for a Return 24 and all the information that went on a nd then the subsequent denial of information that we had requested. I specifically wanted the information in detail from the particular departments that I’m asking for, and I am not satisfied that it has been denied. I a lso w ould ur ge all m embers to vot e for t he information requested. [Motion for a Return 40 lost] Business Credit Card Statements for Economic Development Department M41.

Ms Carlson moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a re turn showing a ll monthly bus iness c redit card statements for the fiscal year 2002-2003 issued to the deputy minister, all assistant deputy ministers, executive directors, directors, branch heads, managers, and unit leaders for the Department of Economic Development. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With respect to Motion for a Return 41 I’m going to indicate on behalf of the Minister of Economic Development that here again, given the MR 24 amend- ment, MR 41 now becomes redundant, so we will be rejecting MR 41. But in doing that, as I indicated in the previous discussion on MR 40, which I did on behalf of the hon. Minister of Environment, I want to make a couple of comments just br iefly, if I could, to address some of the concerns that have just been expressed. I believe the Opposition House Leader indicated something about: all they’re going to get is a retyped version or whatever.

I n fact, according to MR 24 as amended, they will be receiving “a statement of all credit card expenses . . . incurred by” and the amendment goes on. So that should provide the information that I hope they a re looking for, and it will provide it in a consistent, similar sort of grid basis. At least that’s my understanding, and that’s what we’ve asked for to be done.

The only thing wrong with trying to provide copies of the actual credit card statements as requested in the original mo tions – a nd there a re m any of the m he re – i s that, of c ourse, y ou’d have to provide the credit card numbers and specific names and so on. I think what the members opposite are more interested in are probably the amounts and what the categories are, and that’s what MR 24 as amended attempts to incorporate and address. I hope that that will not lead to any inaccurate conclusions on the part of the opposition as the Opposition House Leader indicated.

I hope that it in fact helps out somehow. On that basis, again, Mr. Speaker, Motion for a Return 41 has its explanation, really, contained in the amendment for Motion for a Return 24. Therefore, I am suggesting on behalf of the Minister of Economic Development that we reject MR 41. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. Sp eaking to MR 41, there are some additional points that I’d like to raise around the reference back to Motion for a Return 24. The minister and I met and had long discussions, and the result of that was an agreement on one motion for a return, and that was 23.

I gave a number of reasons and concerns in that meeting about why we wanted the level of detail that we were asking for. 3:00 Here’s another example, Mr. Speaker. From the original motion to the amended Motion for a Return 24 , it changed “issued to” – credit card statem ents issued to certain in dividuals – to “incurred by,” and there’s a difference there. The difference is that they would only be providing the information from these credit card statements that was incurred by the individual whose name the card was in.

So if we had expenses that were incurred by someone else but paid for on that credit card, we would not be getting the information that’s there. I believe that that was the reason for the change in the wording, to make sure that we didn’t get that information or that it was excluded from what was being offered to us. That’s why I objected to it at the time, and it’s why I continue to object to it: because once again we will not understand, where we’ve been given equivalent information between departments, whether we got every deputy minister, every ADM and we can cross-reference between them.

N o, we are not able to do that. In addition, we had asked for monthly credit card statements. We were looking f or t he tracking a round t he times of y ear: were expenditures higher in certain times, lower in c ertain times, con- nected to certain e vents that happened thr oughout t he year, con- nected to travel, before or after? That was why we were asking for it on a monthly basis. Now, the amended motion is simply giving us a statement of all credit card expenses for the fiscal year. So we’ve lost that monthly breakdown.

W e’ve lost the ability to compare between times of year, between events, that sort of thing. So again there’s a le vel of de tail that w e have requested that w e are not getting, and we also cannot tell who contributed information in what category and who didn’t. Now, I’ve heard the Deputy Government House Leader say that, well, we’re going to get it on a grid. If that’s true, then that will be helpful. If w e’re able to see specifically w here w e did n ot get information in a consistent way from every department, then that’s helpful to us.

I k now as well that particularly on these ones where we w ere asking for the credit card statements themselves that are government credit card statements, we’re not asking for these people’s personal credit card statements. Let’s be, you know, absolutely careful about that. What we’re asking for are those credit cards that are issued to them to be used in the c ourse of t heir dut ies as a g overnment employee. S o a ll expenses on t here, one pre sumes, s hould be incurred as a result of their duties.

I know that there was some concern expressed that, well, they didn’t want to be hun g out to d ry on th e f amous orange juice problem. My point is that that’s the argument for detail, because the confusion around the – whatever it was – $27 glass of orange juice was in fact $27 for three jugs of orange juice. But the second bit of detail didn’t come with the first bit of detail, and that’s how mistakes are made, Mr. Speaker.

That’s why we’re asking for the level of detail that we’re asking for, so that we don’t make those kinds of mistakes, so that we don’t subject anyone to unnecessary embarrass- ment or unnecessary scrutiny. The scrutiny that resulted from that orange juice, that $27 orange juice, has lasted for months. If you want to avoid that kind of scrutiny, give the information, complete details, up front, and there isn’t a problem. A s soon as people think that there’s something being hidden, they’re going to start to dig.

Right now there’s the Sierra Madre waiting over there, and that’s why there’s been such interest evoked in the community and from Albertans and from the media around these expenses. So I urge all members to vote in favour of Motion for a Return 41 for the reasons I’ve stated. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie to close the debate.

May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1177 Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like people to vote in favour of this particular motion. It’s for the Department of Economic Development, and that is som ewhat distinct from other departments because this is really the marketing arm of the govern- ment. The way to ben chmark and monitor th eir success or lack thereof is very much through this kind of expense reporting. For us to get an aggregate as is outlined in Motion for a Return 24 is not nearly as helpful as ge tting the detail requested i n the original motion, particularly for this department.

Once again this is a case of the government having said, “Ask for it this way, and you shall receive,” and then finding a way to deny access to the information. With this particular motion, I would urge all members to vote for it. [Motion for a Return 41 lost] Business Credit Card Statements for Sustainable Resource Development Department M42.

Ms Carlson moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a re turn showing a ll monthly bus iness c redit c ard statements for the fiscal year 2002-2003 issued to the deputy minister and all assistant deputy ministers for the Depart- ment of Sustainable Resource Development. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, with Motion for a Return 42 this one also needs to be rejected because effectively it is covered, for the most part at least, under Motion 24 as amended.

In stating that, I just want to comment briefly with respect to some of the comments we’ve just heard from members opposite. It’s true that the Opposition House Leader and I did meet for about an hour and a half or an hour and 40 minutes a couple of weeks back. I will be making a correction to something I indicated on page 1030 when we g et to m otions f or return s th at are af fected by the am ended Motion 34. In any event, during that meeting we did have a very frank and very open discussion, and I th ought that so me progress had been made.

I think that I had indicated and I will indicate again that all of these expenses and so on, regardless of whom they are incurred by, are very carefully and thoroughly reviewed not only by internal processes but also by the Auditor General. I always assumed that opposition members were interested in getting their hands on what the actual expenses were in the various areas, and that’s what MR 24 as amended should be able to provide. There may a lso be othe r pr ocesses a nd proce dures that a ny member of the Ho use might wish to pursue should the y w ant additional information thereafter.

Nonetheless, that is the process, and that pr ocess doe s respect the Fr eedom o f Inf ormation a nd Protection of Priv acy Act, which I know members here are very familiar with. I s hould j ust point out, Mr . Spe aker, that i n f act g overnment always has the opti on to accept an MR or to reject an MR or to accept it as amended. I n every case t hose decisions, I know, are arrived at after considerable consideration to try and provide all the information as requested.

It’s just that from time to time when you see the c onstant re petition w ith all 23 or 2 4 E xecutive Council departments, you can amalgamate the information in a presentable way that allows whatever we’re able to to flow out and save the House a considerable amount of time by not having to go through a debate such as we’re going through now on each one individually.

That having been said, I’m well aware that the members opposite are not asking for personal, residential if you will, credit cards from the deputy ministers and so on that are cited in this particular MR 42, but the fact is that personal names do appear on these statements and so do personal account numbers on behalf of government. That was the point I was trying to make earlier. The two final comments I would make are again with respect to the jugs of orange juice. I don’t know.

I suppose you could be here for a whole year trying to provide all of t hat level o f s crutiny, because you’d b e getting into who drank a whole glass and who drank half a glass and how many p ots o f coffee were ordered. I mean, it just gets a little bit silly after a while, I think people would agree. The po int i s t o pr ovide as accu rate an d as co mprehensive information as possible, and that’s what this amended Motion 24 is going to do. It applies also in this case to Motion for a Return 42. Therefore, there’s no need for us to accept 42.

To the final speaker from the opposition: it doesn’t matter, hon. member, you k now, w hether it ’s Ec onomic D evelopment or any other ministry. We try to apply the same standards right across the board. So we’ll be looking to reject MR 42. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you for the opportunity to join the debate on this. I think that it’s important that it be understood that we’re not questioning the integrity of employees here. We’re not interested in that, and I don’t think that it should be cast in that light. We actually did not ask for names. We asked for positions.

Since we didn’t ask for the names or the credit card numbers, I still don’t see why the statements can’t be taken, block out the number, block out the name, write on it “deputy minister” or “unit leader” or whatever they are, and provide it. That’s what we asked for. It’s giving us a level of detail that we think would have been helpful. The government has committed itself to significantly more work than it needed to had it just done what we’d asked for. They’re now retyping it. 3:10 Secondly, we’d asked for mon thly s tatements; we’re gett ing a statement by the year.

Again we lose the opportunity to watch for an ebb and flow of expenses and to connect them to particular events across the y ear. O nce a gain, i t w as c hanged from c redit cards “issued t o” c ertain p ositions t o e xpenses “ incurred b y” c ertain positions. Very different from what we’re talking about. Again, it excludes expenses that were in fact on a credit card not specifically incurred by the indi vidual whose name it is. S o there’s missing information there. I think that the argument is that whenever we are spending taxpayers’ money, Albertans should be able to review that expenditure of money.

We very clearly were looking for personal and travel expenses. Around w hat the D eputy G overnment House Leader c alls the constant repetition, the fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that those motions that were put forward were ruled out of order because the government has substantially changed the information that we were looking fo r. It does no t ex pressly deal w ith th e detail that w as requested. Giving general statements in aggregate does not satisfy the intent of the original. We would have been very happy if the government had given us exactly what we’d asked for.

We would have been happy to group all ministries together at that point. But they were not willing to do that, and they altered what we were asking for – and I’ve given you some detail of how it was altered – a nd then tried to group it all together. Th at, in f act, was rul ed out of orde r by Parl iamentary

Alberta Hansard May 3, 20041178 Counsel. I mean, to try and put it out there that somehow the opposition was not willing to group these – i n fact, we were very willing to group them if we got the information that we requested. We’re not willing to wipe these off the books when we didn’t get the information that we requested. When the D eputy G overnment H ouse Leade r is ta lking a bout accurate and c omprehensive information and isn’t that wh at we want: yes, and we asked for a certain level of detail, and that’s what we’ll continue to pursue.

So for those reasons among others already stated, I would ask for support for Motion for a Return 42. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie to close the debate. Ms Carlson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. T he Deputy Government House Leader talked about constant repetition. Since these motions have been introduced and I’ve been standing up to ask f or t he information for the departments that I’m responsible for as the critic, what I have heard is the constant deniability of this government to be open and transparent in any remarkable sense.

We have heard constantly the Deputy Government House Leader hiding behind the freedom of information act. T hat act was never designed to hide behind. It was designed to afford information to the people of the province in terms of how their government was being run and how they were spending their money. When he talked about the se s tatements coming f orward w ith personal na mes a nd pe rsonal a ccount num bers, w ell, really, Mr .

Speaker, we know how well their whiteout pen works on anything else that they give us, and we would hope that the smallest amount of work involved in p rocessing this is to w hite out those personal factors rat her tha n c ompletely a ggregate and retype them. H ow much time is the government wasting by doing that? I have to say that this is the end of the ministries that I’m asking for how the y s pent the ir money. I thi nk tha t t hat’s a jus tifiable request. I think that it’s one that is laughable in the reasons that we have seen the government come forward with in terms of denying access.

I would ask all members to please support this motion for a return. [Motion for a Return 42 lost] East Central Health Authority M44. Dr. Massey moved on behalf of Dr. Taft that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the total dol lar amount s pent by the Ea st Ce ntral he alth a uthority on contracts for information technology services broken down by company and total dollar amount for each for the 2002- 2003 fiscal year. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Ma r: Thank you, Mr. Sp eaker. I am com pelled to rejec t Motion for a Return 44.

The reason is that in the year 2002-2003 we had 17 health regions, not nine. T herefore, I cannot provide the requested inf ormation f or t he restructured Ea st Ce ntral he alth authority for the 2002-2003 fiscal year, nor can I provide informa- tion broken down by contractor as requested. The ministry does not require information to be reported by contractor, so these data are not included in the financial statements. However, Mr.

Speaker, this fall after the financial statements for the nine health regions are audited, I will be able to provide the total dollars spent on information technology services by each of these regions. This will be the basis for my rejection of a number of the motions for returns to follow subsequently, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. The Sp eaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods to conclude the debate? [Motion for a Return 44 lost] Acute Care Beds M45. Dr. Massey moved on behalf of Dr.

Taft that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing a breakdown of the number of acute care be ds pe r 1, 000 p eople for each r e- gional health authority. Mr. Ma r: Mr. Spe aker, t he government is pre pared to a ccept Motion for a Return 45. The Speaker: The hon. Me mber f or Edmonton-Mill W oods to conclude the debate. Dr. Massey: Yes. I’d like to thank the minister for supplying that information, Mr. Speaker. [Motion for a Return 45 carried] Public Affairs Bureau M46. Dr. Massey moved on behalf of Mr.

MacDona ld t hat an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the total number of staff in the Public Affairs Bureau broken down by job title, job description, salary, and b onus range for each position. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With respect to Motion for a Return 46 I would refer members of the House back to MR 34 as amended, wherein the original Motio n f or a Return 3 4 cited virtually the same type of information pertaining to salary and bonus ranges and so on specific to the Department of Energy.

We thought it would speed the process up here in the House if we were to bring in an amendment t o MR 34 an d t hen j ust reference it as we go through other similarly related motions for returns, such as we’re doing starting now with Motion for a Return 46. In any case, the amended Motion 34 simply opened up the bonus question to apply to employees within the government of Alberta listed by department for the fiscal year in question, and it goes on. So in this case, Mr. Speaker, Motion for a Return 46, again, finds itself redundant in the light and background of amended Motion for a Return 34.

Therefore, we can in fact reject Motion for a Return 46 because that information, by and large, will be provided for under MR 34 as amended. That having been said, I would just like to indicate, Mr. Speaker, that the salary ranges for the Alberta public service are available on the personnel administration office web site, I’m told. The break- down of performance bonuses, as I indicated, will be provided under the amended Motion for a Return 34 to augment that. So, on that basis, we’re able to reject MR 46, before us now. 3:20 The Speaker: The hon. Opposition House Leader. Ms Blak eman: Thank you very much.

Speaking to MR 46, I noticed that th e De puty G overnment Hou se L eader re ferenced Motion for a Return 34, and during the discussion of Motion for a

May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1179 Return 34 on April 26, as recorded in Hansard on page 1030, I think that the Deputy Government House Leader hornswoggled us, Mr. Speaker. Yes, indeed, he did. He put it out that in fact I had agreed to this amendment, and I most definitively had not. What we have here are a number of differences in the way the amendment comes out.

Let me start out by saying that , once again, if the government wanted to speed up t his process, they could have done it like the autobahn if they had been willing to pro vide the inform ation that was requested without amending it and diffusing the information that was be ing pr ovided and then tr ying to have all s imilar m otions grouped together. If they had been willing to provide the informa- tion, we w ould have happily grouped things, and we would have been out of here weeks ago.

But the g overnment’s ins istence on c hanging the inf ormation that’s being given and controlling the information and, as I h ave shown already, Mr. Speaker, diluting the information being provided and in some cases completely cutting out information that has been requested has now resulted in the process before us. So, as usual, complete control in the hands of the government, and this is the way they have chosen to go at this. What are the changes that are problematic in Motion for a Return 34 which end up being reflected in Motion for a Return 46?

Well, first of all, we asked for the amount of each bonus, not an aggregate amount of all bonuses awarded to all employees. We asked for the amount of each bonus, and we asked for it for senior officials, for each position, not all employees in a department. Again, I’ll point out that we’re not asking for people’s names. We don’t want that. We’re n ot i nterested i n p eople’s n ames; w e’re i nterested i n the position. St aff change; people come and go. W e’re interested in what the position is being offered a bonus for. Now, another thing was changed here.

We were asking for the position and the amount pa id to each o fficial and the number of employees who received a bonus within that range. What we get is a range of bonus dollar amounts. Well, that’s not the exact amount. That’s certainly not what we asked for. So what we’re likely to get from this is rather than a listing of all of the senior officials and the bonuses that were given to them in a given year is a ra nge which says, “ Well, between” – a nd I’m g uessing he re – “ $8,000 and $15,000 in this fiscal year.” And how many people got it? Three hundred. W ell, that gives us very little useful information.

The level of detail that we were seeking has simply been erased from our request here. It does not clarify. It in fact creates confusion. I’m beginning to think that the government is deliberately creating this confusion. Over and over and over ag ain t he same arguments are presented which diffuse the amount of information that is being provided to the opposition and to all Albertans.

So I think that having that clarified, all members of the Assembly would want to support MR 46, particularly because it’s around the Public Affairs Bureau, which is of intense interest to many Albertans these days, and support the information requested under MR 46. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods to close the debate. Dr. Massey: Yes. I think it’s abundantly clear, Mr. Speaker, that what is being done is that the information that’s being requested is being masked, and it really is going to be produced in a form that is of little use, and I think that that’s unfortunate.

Thank you. [Motion for a Return 46 lost] Aspen Regional Health Authority M47. Dr. Massey moved on behalf of Dr. Taft that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return s howing the total d ollar amount s pent by the A spen re gional he alth a uthority on contracts for information technology services broken down by company and total dollar amount for each for the 2002- 2003 fiscal year. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Ma r: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am compelled to reject this motion for a return, being Motion 47, for the same reasons outlined earlier in responding to Motion for a Return 44. [Motion for a Return 47 lost] Capital Health Authority M48. Dr. Massey moved on behalf of Dr. Taft that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showin g th e total do llar amount spent by the Capital health authority on contracts for information technology services broken down by company and total dollar amount for ea ch for the 2002-2003 fiscal year. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Mar: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With respect to Motion for a Return 4 8 I a m aga in fo rced t o re ject t his m otion fo r t he s ame reasons outlined in my response to Motion for a Return 44. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. I’d just like to argue with the minister a bit there because my understanding is that there were no changes in the Capital healt h author ity, and the earlier reasoning that the minister gave for not providing the information was that he’d not collected it in th e form in wh ich we were asking for it.

He w as saying that we were now down to nine and that we were asking for the o ld version of 17 or whichever way round that goes. My understanding is that there were no changes to the boundaries of the Capital health authority, so that should not stand. I w ould a rgue that t his m otion for a re turn s hould i n f act be accepted, particularly in light of the minister’s argument, which in fact supports the acceptance of this motion for a return. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, there in fact were changes to . . . The Speaker: I think, hon.

Minister of Health and Wellness, that I was out of order there. I should have recognized the hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Did you rise too? Mr. Hancock: Not if he’s going to be able to rise. I ju st thought that he couldn’t. The Speaker: No, he’s unfortunately not able to rise. Mr. H ancock: The only reas on I w as rising, Mr. S peaker, w as because I thought that the hon. Minister of Health and Wellness was not able to any longer. I was going to make the same point, that there were significant

Alberta Hansard May 3, 20041180 changes to the boundaries of the Capital health authority, including moving all of the area west of the city including Stony Plain and other areas into the Capital health authority. So the same reasons that were given by the minister earlier are still extant with respect to this motion. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods? Okay. [Motion for a Return 48 lost] Anglo-Canadian Clinics M49. Dr. Massey moved on behalf of Dr.

Taft that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing any and all contracts and memoranda of unde rstanding be tween the Cal gary health region a nd A nglo-Canadian Cl inics regarding the transfer of any do ctors, nu rses, lice nsed practical nurses, technicians, or any other employees of the Calgary health region to the United Kingdom. Mr. Mar: The government will accept Motion for a Return 49. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Dr. Massey: Just again to thank the minister for the information. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. [Motion for a Return 49 carried] 3:30 Executive Council IT Contracts M52. Ms Carlson moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a ret urn sh owing th e cu rrent i nformation tech nology services contract te ndering poli cy a nd proc ess for t he Executive Council. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On Motion for a Return 52 I think w e need to ref er back to M otion f or a Return 16 as amended. We’ll probably notice there that one specific department had been cited for providing this information.

I believe it was the Department o f A boriginal A ffairs a nd N orthern D evelopment. Motion for a Return 16 was amended to withdraw specific reference to one ministry, and it was amended to open it up to all ministers and departments in the government of Alberta regarding the provision of current information technology services contract tendering policy, process, et cetera. Motion for a Return 52 can be rejected on the basis that MR 16 as amended will provide precisely the information that’s being asked for in MR 52.

So MR 52 becomes totally redundant and not necessary since it’s a ccommodated ef fectively und er MR16 as amended. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that this may be an example of where other similar ministries could have in fact been grouped in as long as the information is exactly the same.

MR 52 reads: “the c urrent inform ation techno logy serv ices contract tendering policy and process for the Executive Council.” MR 16 is: “the current i nformation t echnology s ervices c ontract te ndering policy and process for ministers and departments in the government of Alberta.” I think, in fact, that if this would have provided each and every ministry, then we probably could’ve grouped all of these and gone on, in wh ich c ase I w onder w hy the m inister di dn’t ask f or t he grouping, but if it’s meant to come out that we would just get one policy f or e verybody a cross, the n it ’s not the s ame thing a t a ll.

Otherwise, we certainly would’ve been willing to consider grouping. Thanks very much. [Motion for a Return 52 lost] Electronic Health Records M53. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Dr. Taft that an order of the Assembly do i ssue for a return showing the total costs associated w ith the e stablishment of e lectronic he alth records for each regional health authority broken down by costs a ssociated with implementation, dissemination of information, equipment costs, and conversion of hard-copy records to electronic format.

Ms Blakeman: This is following with a particular theme brought forward by my colleague on a num ber of occ asions. We have a concern that what’s happening around access to information a nd electronic health information records may in fact be walking us into a huge outlay of money. We wish to start examining whether in fact that may be the case, and that’s why we’ve asked for this particular information, and I hope that we’re successful in encouraging the minister to provide it. I encourage all members of the Assembly to vote in support of MR 53. Thank you. Mr. Mar: Mr.

Speaker, the government will be rejecting Motion for a Return 53. The information requested is not broken down in the manner in which it is requested. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre to close the debate. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. I regret that that’s not available in the way that we’ve asked for it. If this information does come up again or even if it doesn’t, perhaps the minister would be so kind a s to provide us w ith some helpful hints o n how the inf ormation i s available so that we could request it in the proper format the next time out.

Thank you. [Motion for a Return 53 lost] Palliser Regional Health Authority IT Contracts M55. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Dr. Taft that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the total dollar amount spent by the Palliser health authority on contracts for information technology services broken down by company and total dollar amount for ea ch for the 2002-2003 fiscal year. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Ma r: Thank y ou, Mr . Spe aker.

T he government w ill be rejecting Motion for a Return 55 for the same reasons set out in my response to Motion for a Return 44. [Motion for a Return 55 lost]

May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1181 Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development IT Contracts M56. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Dr. Taft that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the total dollar amount s pent by the Mini stry of A boriginal A ffairs a nd Northern Development on contracts for information technol- ogy services broken down by company and to tal d ollar amount for each for the 2002-2003 fiscal year. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m pleased to rise on behalf of the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Develop- ment. Th e motion before us, MR 56, is ag ain one where we can refer ba ck to a prev iously a mended m otion, a nd tha t w ould be Motion for a Return 10, which, in fact, when it was debated – and as I recall, it was quite a lengthy debate. It was determined then that the intent of the motion here before us today was actually reflected back when Motion for a Return 10 was discussed.

Motion for a Return 10, incidentally, dealt specifically with one ministry only – a s I r ecall, it was t he Ministry of H ealth and Wellness – w here specific inf ormation w as re quested re garding contracts for information technology services, and the provision of a listing o f vendors was also requested for a specific fiscal year.

Here before us is Motion for a Return 56, and it does exactly the same thing e xcept t hat in this c ase it refers to t he Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. [The Deputy Speaker in the chair] So what we did when we accepted Motion for a Return 10 is we simply w ithdrew t he r eference t o o ne s pecific mi nistry, a nd we reworded MR 10 to the following.

That an or der o f the A ssem bly do i ssue fo r a return show ing t he t otal dollar am ount sp ent b y t he govern ment of A lbert a on con tract s for information t echnol ogy se rvices a nd a l isting o f v endo rs pr oviding these services for t he 2 002-2003 fisca l year. That having been said, Mr. Speaker, Motion for a Return 56 can and should fall away because effectively it is covered by Motion for a Return 10 a s amended, w hich w ill prov ide a ll the inf ormation about contracts for IT services as well as a list of the vendors who provided them for the year in question.

As such, Motion for a Return 56 i s redundant and not necessary, and the government is prepared to reject MR 56 on that basis. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you. I very much disagree with the Deputy Government House Leader that this motion is redundant and that the intent is reflected here.

In fact, it’s not reflected here at all, and this, in f act, was the m otion upon w hich a ll others floundered and foundered, depending on whether you’re a sailor or not, because the intent of the information was altered so dramatically from what was requested to what’s being delivered. So this is not redundant, and the intent has not been addressed. What we asked for was the total amount of contracts on informa- tion technology services br oken d own b y company and t he total dollars of the contract. What we get is the total amount spent on the contracts and a listing of vendors.

Those two things are so far away from being the same thing that they might as well be summer and winter; they are so far apart. So this motion is not redundant. Contrary to what the Deputy Government House Leader would like people to believe, it simply is not the case. 3:40 Again, the Official Opposition is seeking detail for a reason, so that we can make better decisions and do better work.

W hen the government provides us with information that is vague, it’s diffused, it’s diluted, it’s masked, or it’s simply omitted – and we don’t know that it was omitted, so we can’t do a reasonable comparison – they just cause problems for themselves. They do create things like the $27 glass of orange juice, which none of us want to see and none of us enjoyed. So if you want to see accurate information, give accurate informa- tion, but don’t try and diffuse it as in what’s being done here with this referral back to Motion for a Return 10. I would urg e all members to support . . . An Hon.

Member: What motion are we talking about? Ms Blakeman: Motion for a Return 56, please. Thank you. [Motion for a Return 56 lost] Peace Country Health Authority IT Contracts M57. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Dr. Taft that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the total dollar amount sp ent by the Pea ce Count ry he alth a uthority on contracts for information technology services broken down by company and total dollar amount for each for the 2002- 2003 fiscal year. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Ma r: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The government is rejecting Motion for a Return 57 for the reasons outlined in my response to Motion for a Return 44. [Motion for a Return 57 lost] Single Trial Court M58. Ms Blakeman moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing all reports or documents dealing with the consultation process with Albertans over the creation of a single trial court. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m proposing to move an amendment to Motion for a Return 58. I believe the amendment has been circulated.

That amendment would amend Motion for a Return 58 by adding “public” before “reports” and striking out “documents” and substituting “consultation papers” so that the motion for a return would read as follows. That a n o rder of the Assembly d o i ssue f or a r eturn s howing a ll public rep ort s and con su ltation papers deal ing with the con su ltation process w ith A lberta ns over th e creation of a single tria l court. Quite frankly, I anticipate the hon. member opposite saying, “By making that amendment, it means that we won’t be getting the stuff we want to get” and all that sort of stuff.

I don’t really care whether they reject the motion or accept the amended motion. I can tell the hon. member that I’m quite happy to give her all the information that I can g ive her about the consu ltation process w ith the single trial court. T here is nothing secret about it; it is a public consultation process. But the way the motion is worded in terms of “all reports or doc uments” m ight put m e into c onflict w ith the Fr eedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act with respect to the release

Alberta Hansard May 3, 20041182 of c ertain doc uments where there m ight be a pr ivacy c oncern because it’s written by a particular member of the public that hasn’t given permission and all those sorts of things. In proposing the amendment, what I’m trying to do, Mr. Speaker, is to accommodate the desire of the member opposite to have access to all the documents relative to the single trial court consultation. I’m happy to meet with h er a t a ny time to talk about one of my favourite topics, to give her whatever information I can give her.

In fact, I h ave som e information r eady to send to her a bout t he consultation documents, et cetera. I t’s just that the nature of the wording of the motion for a return that’s on the table could put me in a position where I could get into difficulty with the law, and I wouldn’t want to do that. Ms Blakeman: No. I would imagine that as Attorney General you wouldn’t want to put yourself in a position of conflict with the law. It does seem a little odd to be agreeing to give me any publi c record. Well, yes, because they’re public, I could probably get them from somewhere else.

But I understand what the minister is saying, and in good faith I’m believing him when he tells me that he’s going to give me everything he can possibly give me. Given his re marks, I would a dd tha t i f he f eels tha t t here’s something that given the wording of this particular amendment he can’t accommodate that he has available and would be willing to share with me, then would he p lease indicate that in some form of written communication with me? I will find a way to request it some other way. I also understand that there is an interim report at this point, which perhaps is not public.

M aybe that’s one of the documents that I could get access to if it’s not already a public document. I believe at this point – and I have no reason to believe otherwise – that the minister is acting in good faith in trying to give me the information that I’m seeking at a level of detail that I’m seeking. I will support the amendment as proposed by the minister. Thank you. [Motion for a Return 58 as amended carried] David Thompson Regional Health Authority IT Contracts M59. Dr. Massey moved on behalf of Dr.

Taft that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the total dol lar amount s pent by the D avid T hompson regional he alth authority on contracts for information technology services broken down by company and total dollar amount for each for the 2002-2003 fiscal year. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Mar: Thank y ou, Mr . Spe aker.

S peaking to Motion f or a Return 59, I am forced to reject this motion for the same reasons outlined earlier in my response to Motion for a Return 44. [Motion for a Return 59 lost] Department of Human Resources and Employment IT Contracts M60. Dr. Massey moved on b ehalf of Mr. MacDon ald that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the total amount s pent by the Mini stry of H uman Resources and Employment o n co ntracts for in formation tech nology services broken down by company and total dollar amount for each for the 2002-2003 fiscal year. The Deputy Speaker: The hon.

Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. T his is again another case where one particular ministry is cited. In this case, it’s the Ministry of H uman R esources and Employment, but in fact t he essence of this particular MR does go back to the very first one in the series, so to speak, which was Motion for a Return 10, and that one specifically dealt w ith th e Ministry of Health and We llness.

When we were debating Motion for a Return 10, we did approve an amendment tha t s imply w ithdrew the re ference to one s pecific ministry a nd i n i ts p lace s ubstituted t he e ntire g overnment of Alberta. Information regarding technology services and a listing of all the vendors and so on will be provided under Motion for a Return 10 as amended. Therefore, Motion for a Return 60 is redu ndant in th at regard. So we are able to reject Motion for a Return 60 on that basis. Thank you. [Motion for a Return 60 lost] 3:50 Department of Government Services IT Contracts M61. Dr. Massey moved on be half of Mr.

MacDon ald that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the total dollar amount spent by the Ministry of Government Services on contracts f or in formation technol ogy serv ices broken down by company and total dollar amount for each for the 2002-2003 fiscal year. Dr. Massey: I think it’s clear, Mr. Speaker, that the intent is to have information about each of the departments and not have it masked by being amalgamated. So I don’t think we can call this redundant with th e m otion the government has pro posed.

W hat they had passed is something quite different from what the Official Opposi- tion has requested. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, here we have one specific m inistry be ing a sked to pr ovide inf ormation. I t’s the Ministry of Government Services in th is case. The motion before dealt with the Mini stry of H uman Resources and Employment.

We’ll go back again to the amendment that was proposed for Motion for a Return 10, which was the Ministry of Health and Wellness, and in fact the bulk of the information, I’m sure, requested here und er MR 61 wil l be pr ovided f or a nd de alt w ith u nder t he a mended Motion for a Return 10. So for the same reasons as I just enunciated regarding MR 60, we are able to reject MR 61 on the same basis. Thank you. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods to conclude debate. Dr. Massey: Thank you. I think that’s unfortunate.

The informa- tion that we’re asking for won’t be provided should this motion fail, Mr. Speaker. [Motion for a Return 61 lost] Department of Energy IT Contracts M62. Dr. Massey mo ved on behalf of Mr. MacDonald th at an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing the total dollar amount spent by the Ministry of Energy on contracts

May 3, 2004 Alberta Hansard 1183 for i nformation t echnology s ervices br oken down by company and total dollar amount for each for the 2002-2003 fiscal year. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Once again the motion for a return that’s before us now cites one particular ministry – in this case, it’s the Ministry of Energy – and it ties back directly to Motion for a Return 10, which as amended will provide the informa- tion regarding contracts for information technology services, and it will provide a listing of vendors who provide those services for the year in question. So on the basis of what I’ve indicated regarding MR 60 and 61 and now 62 and previously MR 10 as amended, we are able to reject MR 62. Thank you. Dr. Mas sey: Again, t hat re jection, Mr.

Spe aker, i s denying the opposition the information that we’ve asked for. [Motion for a Return 62 lost] Calgary Regional Health Authority IT Contracts M64. Dr. Massey moved on behalf of Dr. Taft that an order of the Assembly d o issue f or a return sho wing the total d ollar amount spent by the Calgary health authority on contracts for inf ormation t echnology s ervices brok en down by company and total dollar amount for each for the 2002-2003 fiscal year. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Mr. Mar: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I’m forced to reject Motion f or a Return 64 f or the rea sons o utlined in m y ea rlier response to Motion for a Return 44. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods to conclude debate. Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can understand the reasons the minister has given, that there have been changes in the authori- ties and in t he reporting procedure. I ’m not sure that there isn’t another way to get that information, but I thank him for his response. [Moti