Alberta Hansard — 15 March 1974, Morning sitting (10:00) (Legislature 17, Session 3)

19740315

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 241 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Friday, March 15, 1974 10:00 a.m. [The House met at 10:00 o'clock.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SELECT COMMITTEES MR . COOKSON: Mr. Speaker, yesterday, as Chairman of the Special Committee, I inadvertently left off the report of the Standing Committee On Public Affairs which is made up of all members of the Assembly with the exception of yourself. With the indulgence of the Assembly I would like to correct this error and have it included in the written records of the Assembly today. MR.

LUDWIG: Your apology is accepted. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, overlooking the inappropriate remarks, I move that the second report of the Special Committee be now received and concurred in. MR. LUDWIG: You too. AN HON. MEMBER: We'll have a vote. MR. SPEAKER: Perhaps we can deal with both items at once. Has the hon. Member for Lacombe leave to amend the report as requested? Do you all agree to the motion by the hon. Government House Leader? [The motion was carried.] head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS MR . LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce three bills ... MR. SPEAKER: I believe the hon.

Member for Spirit River-Fairview had it by a nose.

242 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 Bill No. 203 The Refined Petroleum Products Wholesale Prices Control Act MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce Bill No. 203, The Refined Petroleum Products Wholesale Prices Control Act. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of Bill No. 203 is to authorize wholesale price controls on all petroleum products sold in the Province of Alberta. [Leave being granted, Bill No. 203 was introduced and read a first time.] Bill No. 204

An Act to Limit Smoking in Public Places Bill No. 200

An Act to amend The Ombudsman Act Bill No. 201

An Act to Provide for the Protection of News Sources MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce three bills, the first being,

An Act to Limit Smoking in Public Places. The purpose of this bill - it is really an anti-pollution bill. The real purpose of this bill is to try to prevent a lot of young people from beginning to smoke, and if we can save a few addicts along the way, all the better, Mr. Speaker. The second bill that I wish to introduce is,

An Act to amend The Ombudsman Act. It's the reintroduction of a bill that was introduced last session. I am presenting this bill to have the issue debated again this session, Mr. Speaker. The third bill is

an Act to Provide for The Protection of News Sources. It's also a bill that was introduced last session. I'm reintroducing it at this session. AN HON. MEMBER: Once more and we'll get another crack at it. MR. SPEAKER: I would suggest that on a future occasion if other hon. members have bills to introduce, we should take them one at a time. [Leave being granted, Bill No. 201 was introduced and read a first time.] MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I thought I introduced the non-smoking one first and in that order. MR. SPEAKER: I was reading them out in the order in which they arrived.

I will change that. [Leave being granted, Bills No. 200, 201 and 204 were introduced and read a first time.] MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. All I wish is that the bills appear on the Order Paper in the order in which I introduced them. Would that be possible? The non-smoking and the Ombudsman one, and the disclosure of news sources last. I would appreciate them in that order. MR. SPEAKER: I take it there will be no difficulty or objection. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 243 Bill No. 39 The Agriculture Statutes Amendment Act, 1974 (No. 2) MR. FLUKER: Mr. Speaker, it being a morning for many omnibus bills to be introduced, I have another one. I beg leave to introduce The Agriculture Statutes Amendment Act, 1974 (No. 2). Mr. Speaker, these are housekeeping amendments, having regard to REAs and co-ops. [Leave being granted, Bill No. 39 was introduced and read a first time.] Bill No. 44 The Department of Industry and Commerce Amendment Act, 1974 MR. JAMISON: Mr.

Speaker, I beg leave to introduce a bill, being Bill No. 44 The Department of Industry and Commerce Amendment Act, 1974. The Industry and Commerce Act, Mr. Speaker, requires amendment because some of its provisions are outdated and duplicate legislation of other departments and because it does not provide the means for pursuing the department's current objectives of designing and managing programs to stimulate the orderly growth, development and diversification of industry and commerce in the province. [Leave being granted, Bill No. 44 was introduced and read a first time.] MR. HYNDMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I move that the following three bills be placed on the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders: Bill No. 39, The Agriculture Statutes Amendment Act, 1974 (No. 2); Bill No. 44, The Department of Industry and Commerce Amendment Act, 1974; Bill No. 48, The Improvement Districts Amendment Act, 1974. [The motion was carried.] head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR . ASHTON: Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure to introduce two classes of Grade 4 students from Waverley School in my constituency. They are sitting in the members gallery, accompanied by teachers Mrs. Medwick and Mrs.

Davies and several interested parents. I would ask them to please stand and be recognized by this Assembly. MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce a school from ... [interjections] ... Brookside School in Edmonton Whitemud. Mr. Speaker, this is a Grade 5 class. Some are sitting, as a matter of fact, on both sides of the Legislature. They are accompanied by Mrs. Scott, Mrs. Christofferson, Mr. Norris, Mr. Hobson and Mr. Robblee. I'd ask them please to stand and be recognized. head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR . DOWLING: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to file with the House the food price statistics prepared jointly by the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Consumer Affairs. I should say in filing these, Mr. Speaker, that the method of gathering these statistics and the

244 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 information provided is being updated and refined to provide greater information for the House. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Public and Catholic School Assessments MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the first question of the Minister of Education and ask the hon. minister if it is the government's intention to introduce legislation at this session dealing with the question of pro rata division of assessment, and with the problem that Separate school boards have had as far as supplementary requisitions are concerned.

Will the government be introducing legislation at this session to deal with that problem? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, we're now in the process of completing our consideration of all aspects of that matter in respect of which a number of submissions have been made over the past months. I would anticipate being in a position to present to the House the government's position on the matter, probably within the next six or seven days. Certainly the goal we seek would be to move towards obtaining the maximum amount of equity and fairness for all taxpayers and all students in the province. MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. In the course of the government's deliberation, has serious consideration been given to the concept of a pro rata distribution based on the percentage of students who attend the two systems, rather than on the present designation of corporate assessment? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, we have given consideration to a large number of submissions and alternatives which have been put forward, and the conclusion which we will be drawing will be available, as I said, within six or seven days. MR. GRUENWALD: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the minister.

Would your statement and your study apply to areas other than Calgary and Edmonton? MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I don't believe I limited my remarks geographically in any way. Food Price Statistics MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister of Consumer Affairs. I'd like to ask the minister if the reports he tabled today are the highly sophisticated reports that he referred to earlier during this session? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, they are not the refined ones.

We've had the first report of these refined ones on my desk for a matter of two or three days and they will be coming on a continuing basis, done - in order to save staff, Mr. Speaker - by the people employed under the Department of Agriculture. You know, Mr. Speaker, our job, of course, is to maintain a very effective civil service and on this basis we have not hired ... MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The hon. minister is lapsing into debate.

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 245 MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. When might we expect these highly sophisticated reports that the minister referred to earlier during this session? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, the refined statistics are going to be made available to the House once we get another report so we have some comparative data. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, one more supplementary question to the Minister of Consumer Affairs. Earlier this week he referred to the work done by Mrs. Plumptre and her committee. Is that the same Mrs.

Plumptre whose salary the federal Conservatives voted yesterday to have reduced to $1? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, I only know of one Mrs. Plumptre, but I should say regarding the statistics, it's interesting to note that of the western cities, the escalation in comparative figures ... SOME HON. MEMBERS: Order, order. MR. SPEAKER: There is grave doubt in the Speaker's mind whether the additional statistics will serve to identify Mrs. Plumptre better. [Laughter] The hon. Member for Edmonton Kingsway followed by the hon. Member for Sedgewick- Coronation. Nursing Homes - Cost-Sharing DR. PAPROSKI: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. Mr. Speaker, a question to the hon. Minister of Health and Social Development. What federal funds will now flow back to Albertans yearly as a result of the recent federal agreement to take

part in the cost-sharing of nursing homes in Alberta, which I humbly suggest was strongly recommended in 1971, 1972, 1973 ... [Interjections] MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. DR. BUCK: 1969, '68, '67, '65. [Laughter] MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. Member for Clover Bar is through his countdown now, I can maybe answer the question. I wish I could fully answer the question today, Mr. Speaker.

The incident that the hon. member refers to as being a very significant development in the recent past in respect to this, is that during the conference of welfare ministers held here last month, an understanding was reached with the federal government that for the first time there would be cost-sharing on a broad base in respect to the Alberta nursing home program. However the exact amount has not been established because the formula is still being finalized.

246 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 DR. PAPROSKI: One supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Is it not true then, Mr. Minister, that the formula when worked out federally-provincially, and if it is, at the 25 or 50 per cent rate, would represent a cost saving to Albertans ... [Interjections] MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The hon. member's question is clearly hypothetical from close to the beginning. DR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, then I'll rephrase and ask another supplementary question. Mr. Speaker, and Mr. Minister, if some cost-sharing had been arranged over the past 10 years then this would have ... MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. The hon. Member for Sedgewick-Coronation followed by the hon. Member for Calgary Bow. Feedlot Pollution Guidelines MR. SORENSON: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the the Minister of the Environment, I will direct this question to the Minister of Agriculture. Has the minister received complaints from feedlot operators to the effect that the feedlot pollution guidelines are working a hardship on them and are, in fact, increasing the cattle feeder costs extensively? DR. HORNER: No, Mr. Speaker. MR. SORENSON: A supplementary to the minister.

Is the pollution guidelines program working, or is it true that the feedlot operators are simply ignoring it? DR. HORNER: The answer to that is also no, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Bow followed by the hon. Member for Drumheller. Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Public Works. Can the hon. minister advise if the government has decided in which city the Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission will be located, and if they've found offices? DR. BACKUS: Mr.

Speaker, I think I should explain that the Department of Public Works is primarily a service department. It doesn't decide where other departments establish their services. We would normally provide the accommodation when the relevant department has decided where this particular service is to be located. MR. WILSON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of Public Works. Can the minister advise if, as a member of the team, his department does not find office spaces for other government departments?

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 247 DR. BACKUS: The short answer to that, Mr. Speaker, is yes. MR. WILSON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. Can the hon. minister advise of the location of the Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Mines and Minerals who I am certain, during the course of this session, will be able to deal with the matter of the location of the Petroleum Marketing Commission, I would just ask the hon. member to hold his enthusiasm until that opportunity is presented. MR.

WILSON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Attorney General. Can the hon. Attorney General advise briefly the nature of services flowing from the offices of the Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission that would be available to members of the Legislature? MR. GETTY: Mr. Speaker, I just mentioned that the Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission is the responsibility of the hon. Mr. Dickie who is attending the Premier’s prayer breakfast and is not able to get back yet for the session. When he is back he would be happy to answer as many questions as possible on the matter. MR. WILSON: A supplementary, Mr.

Speaker, to the hon. Deputy Premier. Can the hon. Deputy Premier please advise other members of the team that the offices on the sixth floor of the Bow Valley Square Building ... MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The time for ministerial announcements has passed. DR. HORNER: The hon. member should appreciate that once these decisions are made they will be conveyed to the House. Until such time as those decisions are made he will just have to contain himself and appreciate that that is the way government operates. AN HON. MEMBER: Such righteous indignation. [Interjections] MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

The hon. member has now had four supplementaries. Perhaps we could come back to this topic in the second round. The hon. Member for Drumheller followed by the hon. Member for Lac La Biche-McMurray. Transportation Studies MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the hon. Minister of Industry and Commerce. Having regard to the discussions with the federal Minister of Transport, what are the deadlines for the proposed breakthroughs on the several transportation matters you mentioned? MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, the track study and the cost disclosure are all to be completed.

The studies are to be completed by June, and the opportunity for the ministers to review them

248 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 and come up with some conclusions as recommended by the officials and acted on by the ministers will be by September. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Then there is a good chance of these becoming a reality by the end of this year? MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, I would say yes. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Lac La Biche-McMurray followed by the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview. Check Stop DR. BOUVIER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question today to the hon.

Solicitor General and ask her if she could advise the House on the effectiveness - or probably, the ineffectiveness - of the Check Stop program? MISS HUNLEY: Mr. Speaker, it's a fairly involved question but I would be pleased to comment on it in some detail. We believe the effectiveness has been very great and the reception has been quite positive. The reports I get from the police departments are sent to me every two weeks, consequently they are always running about two weeks behind time.

But they indicate a very positive reaction towards it and it's been very widely accepted particularly by the police departments and the public at large. DR. BOUVIER: A supplementary question. Does the minister have in her possession any statistics to back up the fact that there are fewer drunken drivers on the road? MISS HUNLEY: Mr. Speaker, I don't think that we will ever be able to resolve hard statistical facts. I think philosophically, and the feeling the police departments convey to me and the public conveys to me, is that there are fewer impaired drivers on the road.

I think it is a little early to even attempt to measure, because it has been in effect since October and weather conditions have a great effect on the number of drivers for example, the number of accidents and so on. Also, can we say that we're not picking them up so that means they are not on the road? Or could it be interpreted that they are being missed? We have the feeling that there are fewer of them on the road and people are becoming more sensitive to it, which was the aim of the program in the first place. MR. SPEAKER: Has the hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview asking a supplementary? MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to either the hon. Minister of Highways or the hon. Solicitor General dealing with the question of reducing highway fatalities. Has the government monitored the reduction of deaths in the United States as a result of lowering the speed limit? MISS HUNLEY: My department has not, although we are very interested in it. In my own office particularly, we have merely been looking at news releases and so on but we do have ongoing discussions with the various police departments to obtain their reaction.

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 249 MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The connection of that supplementary with the foregoing question is extremely doubtful. The hon. Member for Lac la Biche-McMurray I believe has a supplementary, followed by a final supplementary by the hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View. DR. BOUVIER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, supplementary to the minister. I wonder if the minister has in her possession and could make available to the House any comparative figures on convictions for impaired driving during the period prior to the Check Stop program and since the Check Stop program has been in effect? MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. member's question would be eminently fitted for the Order Paper. The hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View with a final supplementary. MR. LUDWIG: Supplementary to the hon. Solicitor General. Would the Solicitor General care to comment on the report that appeared in the press that the greater number of impaired driving charges still laid . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Clearly and specifically under 171 of Beauchesne a request of a minister to comment on a press report is out of order. MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, I had hardly made my question before you made your ruling. MR. SPEAKER: The hon.

Member for Spirit River-Fairview followed by the hon. Member for Cypress. MR. JAMISON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Oh yes, we missed a supplementary by the hon. Member for St. Albert. MR. JAMISON: Mr. Speaker, I was wondering if the Solicitor General might have any knowledge of the number of buses that were used over the Christmas festive season by organizations that didn't use cars in order to take people back and forth to ... MR. SPEAKER: I believe that question could also be put on the Order Paper. The hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview followed by the hon. Member for Cypress. AN HON.

MEMBER: You'd better go into caucus, you two. Consumer Groups - Grants MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the hon. Minister of Telephones and Utilities, I'd like to address this question to the Minister of Consumer Affairs. In light of the request of Alberta Power to increase rates, can the minister advise the Assembly whether or not the government will be making any assistance to consumer groups to make representation before the Public Utilities Board?

250 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, I'm not just positive what facility the Minister of Telephones and Utilities has in this regard. But we have given a grant, as the hon. member knows, to the Consumers' Association of Canada for this very purpose. If this amount doesn't suffice, I'm sure we would entertain a presentation from them. Calgary Power - Rate Increase MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. Minister of Consumer Affairs or perhaps to the hon. Deputy Premier.

Has the government taken any position with respect to the rate-increase application or are they maintaining a position of neutrality? DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, the Legislature has set up certain mechanisms for deciding this particular question and that is through the Public Utilities Board. We would have to await their report at least until we take further action. MR. MINIELY: Mr.

Speaker, I might just supplement my honourable colleague's statements by informing all members of the House, in case they weren't aware, that as a result of negotiations which carried on for some months and the leadership taken by this government and by the treasury department, we were able to further accelerate the rebate of income tax from the federal government to the province.

We anticipate as a result of this successful negotiation that a substantial portion of any rate increase which the PUB has granted will be offset, to a large degree, by accelerated tax rebates from the federal government as a result of this negotiation. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, one final supplementary question to either the Deputy Premier or the hon. Provincial Treasurer.

In light of yesterday's decision by the PUB to grant an interim rate increase to Calgary Power, can either minister advise the Assembly when we can expect the final disposition of this question, a final decision by the PUB on Calgary Power's 15 per cent rate increase? DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, I'm sure the hon. member appreciates that the question before the Public Utilities Board is a very complex one, having regard to electrical power rating. I'm sure they will bring forward their decision as soon as possible.

As to when we might expect that report, I'll take the question as notice and refer it to my colleague, the Minister of Telephones and Utilities. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Cypress followed by the hon. Member for Wainwright. Commonwealth Games MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the hon. Provincial Treasurer. Has the government made any firm commitment of support to the City of Edmonton in its bid for the Commonwealth games? MR. MINIELY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think that that has been so well publicized that I'm surprised the hon. member would ask that question.

However, back in January of 1973, I believe, more than one year ago, the provincial government committed $11.6 million based on one- third of a maximum of $35 million as this province's commitment if the City of Edmonton chose to host the British Commonwealth Games.

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 251 MR. STROM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I like to have my memory refreshed at times. Can I ask a supplementary question, if I may? In the event that the plebiscite should fail, does the provincial government have any contingency plans to deal with the matter? MR. SPEAKER: With great respect, the hon. member's question is clearly supplementary and perhaps might be repeated after the result of the plebiscite is known. MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, it is a supposition in a sense but also it is dealing with a matter very much in the minds of the people.

My question is simply has the government given any consideration to contingency plans? AN HON. MEMBER: Sit down. We know. MR. SPEAKER: If there is any doubt about the propriety of the question, I would have to say that in that form it's acceptable. MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, maybe I could add to this. Of course the commitment by the provincial government is entirely dependent on the actual cost of the capital facilities. In other words, it is one-third of the actual capital cost or $11.6 million, excluding land.

Therefore if the city should decide to build facilities for $3 million, which is highly improbable, the province's contribution would be $1 million only. DR. BUCK: A supplementary question to the Provincial Treasurer or the Minister of Culture, Youth and Recreation. Has the City of Edmonton been given a letter of intent or has it just been announced? Has there been any formal ... AN HON. MEMBER: Read the papers! DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, you can't always believe everything these fellows tell you. I want to know ... MR. SPEAKER: Order please. DR. BUCK: ... [Inaudible] ... a written letter of intent.

That's all I want to know. MR. MINIELY: Mr. Speaker, the hon. members on the other side seem to have some difficulty in understanding. I think our commitment is rather clear. This government has committed, and the province has committed $11.6 million if the citizens of Edmonton decide to host the British Commonwealth Games. Depending on the facilities - the formula is based on one-third of the cost - if the facilities are built for less than that, then the province will contribute one-third. But it hinges on the hosting of the British Commonwealth Games. That should be clear. MR. SPEAKER: The hon.

Leader of the Opposition, followed by the hon. Member for Spirit River- Fairview with a final supplementary.

252 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my supplementary question to either the Provincial Treasurer or the Minister of Culture, Youth and Recreation. Does the Province of Alberta, as of today, have contingency plans dealing with the plebiscite that is to come up on Wednesday if the plebiscite is turned down? Do you have contingency plans? MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, I can answer that very easily. It's quite certain that the responsibility for the British Commonwealth Games rests entirely with the City of Edmonton and its citizens.

If they want it, they will vote so on March 20. MR. CLARK: A further supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the minister. Is it true you have no ... MR. SPEAKER: Order. The hon. Member for Spirit River-Fairview with a final supplementary. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, the supplementary question I would like to pose to the hon. minister is, is the government's commitment of $11.6 million contingent upon the approval of the plebiscite? MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, in this case, my answer would be that the commitment does not rest on the method of financing for the British Commonwealth Games. Airstrip Development Program MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Wainwright followed by the hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View. MR. RUSTE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Industry and Commerce. I would like to ask him if he has any further information at this time on the airstrip development program that was referred to at the last session? MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, yes, we have a program that we will be announcing, depending upon the Budget Speech, of course. Companies Branch Location MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View followed by the hon. Member for Medicine Hat-Redcliff. MR. LUDWIG: Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the hon. Minister of Consumer Affairs. When will the Companies Branch be moved and what is its destination so far as location is concerned in the City of Edmonton? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, I really do appreciate that question from the hon. member because I know he has some concern with the Companies Branch because he is a lawyer.

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 253 The Companies Branch is now located on 124 Street. We have made arrangements to have all the branches located in a central building, as central as we can get it, and that is the Petroleum Plaza. However, there is some concern about that in the legal fraternity. They have suggested that we move further down into the central core of Edmonton. This matter is under active consideration by the Consumer Affairs department and the Department of Public Works.

Discussions are ongoing and our choice has to be whether we want to move our Companies Branch twice, leave them where they are, and move to the central core later on, or how we'll handle it. We are very much aware of the legal fraternity’s views on this subject. We've met with them on numerous occasions to discuss this and other matters. MR. LUDWIG: A supplementary to the hon. minister. Do I gather from the hon. minister's answer that he knows that the Companies Branch is going, but he doesn't know where? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, we know exactly where they're going. MR. LUDWIG: Where?

MR. DOWLING: Up. MR. LUDWIG: Yes, up yours also. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View followed by the hon. Member ... sorry, that was the hon. Member for Medicine Hat-Redcliff, followed by the hon. Member for Hanna-Oyen. DRES MR. WYSE: A question, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. Has the provincial government contacted the federal government regarding the phasing out of DRES and requested it to reverse its decision? AN HON. MEMBER: DRES? Is that a new soap product? MR. GETTY: Mr.

Speaker, earlier in the session the hon. member raised the matter of the research establishment that was moving from the Suffield area to Manitoba. Since that time I have had an opportunity to meet with the hon. member and the member, Mr. Mandeville, and they have presented me with a very good brief from the residents in the area. We have now had an opportunity to raise this with the Department of National Defence. Also yesterday, when Mr.

Gillespie was here, we raised the matter with him, with the possibility that while the decision on the switch of the existing research facilities or capability has been taken and may be irrevocable, it may possibly be replaced by something. The federal government recognized the validity of the brief that was presented and will respond to us as to whether or not some alternative facility may be located there. We're hopeful that it will meet the problems raised in the hon. member's question and in the brief from the area.

254 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 MR. WYSE: One supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Did the minister give any indication that the decision may be reversed? MR. GETTY: I would have to say, Mr. Speaker, that the inclination was that it was a decision taken, and is firm. However, that is just a judgment; it could possibly be reversed. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Hanna-Oyen followed by the hon. Member for Clover Bar. 1974 Road Map MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Minister of Highways and Transport. What department is responsible for producing the 1974 road map? MR. COPITHORNE: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the road map is produced in the mapping division of the Department of Highways, but it was designed, as I understand, by the department of tourism. MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. Who made the decision to leave Highway No. 41 off the vacation part of the map? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, that matter was dealt with at some length. Our purpose in having - I'm sure the hon. member is referring to the reverse side of the regular road map. What we wanted to portray in that very brief map, Mr. Speaker, were the major routes, the major attractions throughout the province.

I'm sure as time goes on that the attractions and the facility development in Alberta will increase and we will undoubtedly add to that map. However, we did not want it to be cluttered up. We wanted it to be very 'non-detailed'. As a result, some of the places like Grande Cache were left off. I think that was just and right. MR. FRENCH: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that a good portion of Highway 41 has been built and paved, what is the reason it is not on the map? MR. DOWLING: Mr.

Speaker, if a tourist travelling in Alberta wants to find a route between A and B he looks at the other side of the map and it's all there, all the major roads, those paved, those gravelled, upgraded and so on. So it is there in detail on one side of the map. The other side of the map, as I said, is strictly to indicate the major tourist attractions throughout all of the province. MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, could I ask the hon. minister another question. What is the reason Dinosaur Park is all indicated north of the Red Deer River when, in fact, it is south of the Red Deer River? MR.

DOWLING: That is one of the things I am not able to comment on. Of course there are always a few errors in any kind of production. We could either look to rerouting the river or changing the map. If the hon. member would bring the matter to my attention by memo, I'll make sure it's changed, if in fact that is correct. MR. FRENCH: A final supplementary question. Oh ...

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 255 MR. COPITHORNE: You know, if the hon. Member for Hanna-Oyen had really taken a good close look, in the printing, Dinosaur Provincial Park straddles the river. Also Highway 41 is not completed. The map is not to mislead tourists coming into the province that it is a complete road all the way through. Hopefully in the next three or four years it will be completed, an effort that the former government couldn't do in 37 years. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. We should perhaps move to another map. There are two more supplementaries by the hon. Member for Little Bow and the hon.

Member for Drumheller, and then we will go on to the next topic. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is to the Minister of Consumer Affairs, too. Why are the provincial parks left off of the "Vacation Alberta" map and in particular Little Bow Provincial Park? MR. DOWLING: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all this map is simply a road map. Secondly, when someone writes in for a package and wants information on Alberta, we provide them with a package. In that package this year will be a document of some consequence.

We felt that we should produce something that does justice to each of the 14 zones in Alberta. So we have enlisted the assistance of the Travel Industry Association of Alberta and those 14 zones to, in fact, write their package. That brochure is there. It deals with parks, with all of the facility development within each zone. So this is an initial piece. There is follow-up literature contained in the package when somebody writes in for that information. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary to the hon. Minister of Consumer Affairs.

Having regard to the travel portion of the map on which Empress has not been placed, does the hon. minister fear that Empress people might want to secede from Alberta and join Saskatchewan? MR. DOWLING: No question, they won't, Mr. Speaker, judging by the gross general revenue of the provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba. In Alberta, we far exceed the other provinces in terms of escalation. So I would say there is no problem. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Clover Bar followed by the hon. Member for Pincher Creek- Crowsnest. Foster Parents - Family Allowance DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to address my question to the hon. Minister of Health and Social Development. I would like to know if the minister has had the opportunity to meet with the Foster Parents Association in the last while or is he going to meet with them? MR. CRAWFORD: I remarked upon that in the House a few days ago, Mr. Speaker, when I reported to those present that a cabinet committee had met with Mrs. Potter, who is the Alberta president of the Foster Parents Association, and had indicated to her that a response would be forthcoming within about three weeks of the time of our meeting.

I suppose when I look at that now, that is about two weeks ago. DR. BUCK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Is the hon. minister in a position to indicate to the House if he has reassessed his position on whether the foster parents will be able to

256 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 receive the so-called baby bonus before the first year expires or if they will be able to receive it immediately? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, my response to that would be that I don't wish to add anything to the statement I gave to the House in that respect the other day. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Pincher Creek-Crowsnest followed by the hon. Member for Calgary Bow. Correctional Institutions - Debtors MR. DRAIN: Mr. Speaker, this question is to the hon. Attorney General.

The question is, in view of these inflationary times and the number of people who are presently in jails because of debt, would he consider building a de-escalator factor into the time-honoured practice of one day equals one dollar? MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I have a little difficulty being sure of what the hon. member has in mind. But I think he's referring to a situation that existed under a former administration and some time ago.

All I can say in answer to the honourable gentleman's question is that when dealing with legislation that has been introduced in the House in the past we have taken into account the question of the dollar depreciation when setting the fine and providing for alternate terms in correctional institutions. MR. LUDWIG: Supplementary to the hon. Attorney General. At what stage in the administration of his department will he stop passing the buck? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Bow followed by the hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View. Insurance Department Transfer MR. WILSON: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the hon. Deputy Premier. Can the hon. Deputy Premier advise or confirm that it is the intention of the government to move the provincial insurance department from the jurisdiction of consumer affairs to that of the Attorney General? DR. HORNER: No, Mr. Speaker, any announcements such as that will be made in due course, if they are made. MR. WILSON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Would the hon.

Deputy Premier undertake to have the government consider transferring the provincial insurance department from the jurisdiction of consumer affairs to that of the Attorney General's department? DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, I suppose that the government continues to consider all of these matters. Having regard to how the insurance branch was run under the previous government, it certainly needed to be moved somewhere.

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 257 MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View followed by the hon. Member for Wainwright. MR. CLARK: That was almost three years ago. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View followed by the hon. Member for Wainwright. MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, I have asked my question. You have got me down twice. I have no further questions. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Wainwright. Palliser Wheat Growers Association MR. RUSTE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Agriculture.

Has he been able to obtain at this time the number of members of the Palliser Wheat Growers [Association] in Alberta? DR. HORNER: Somewhere in the neighbourhood of 300 and 350. ORDERS OF THE DAY head: GOVERNMENT BILLS AND ORDERS (Second Reading) Bill No. 13 The Assessment Appeal Board Amendment Act, 1974 MRS. CHICHAK: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 13, being The Assessment Appeal Board Amendment Act, 1974. The principle of the bill is to expand the membership of the Alberta Assessment Appeal Board from three members to six and to enable the board to sit in two divisions of three members each.

The bill also clarifies and increases the discretionary powers of the Alberta Appeal Board in its decisions from the appeals it considers. Such increased powers are, of course, in line with amendments made in The Municipal Taxation Amendment Act, 1973 with regard particularly to classification of residential property in a municipality carrying out its assessment. I would just like to say briefly that I'm sure we are all aware that the property owners must file their applications for review of their property tax assessments first to a court of revision.

If the property owners who have had their applications considered are dissatisfied with the decisions made by the court of revision they must, of course, file their appeal with the Alberta Assessment Appeal Board within 21 days of the decision handed down by the court of revision. It is important to put forward to you what in fact the current situation is with regard to assessment appeals. In the City of Edmonton as a result of a general assessment in 1973, which was carried out for the first time in eight years, a great deal of difficulty and dissatisfaction was caused amongst the property owners.

This resulted in a

258 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 great number of appeals, or in a great number of applications put forward before the Court of Revision, out of which some 900 parcels have been brought forward for appeals before the Assessment Appeal Board. These 900 parcels in fact represent some 1,500 items of land and/or improvements to be considered by the Appeal Board. The Assessment Appeal Board received its 1973 appeals from the City of Edmonton in early February of this year, 1974. To date they report that they have considered only some 200 appeals - only Edmonton appeals from the general assessment carried out in 1973.

The board currently sits four days per week, utilizing the fifth day for handing down their decisions and other administrative work. This means that the current three- member appeal board is working a full five-day week. We have to remember that this is only to deal with the Edmonton appeals resultant from the general assessment of 1973. To complete this portion of the appeals, the board has indicated that it will take them, at the rate of five days a week, approximately nine months, bringing the matter still under consideration into September of 1974.

In addition to this workload, appeals are now coming before the board out of the 1974 annual assessments of various centres. There are the annual assessments of Edmonton and Calgary, plus anticipated annual assessments from the counties of Ponoka, Wetaskiwin, Leduc, Drumheller and also such towns as Taber, Fort Macleod, Fairview, Fort McMurray, Lacombe, just to list a few. I think the total list of towns given to me at this time was approximately 12. This list does not include the anticipated appeals from villages.

And, in 1975, Calgary will be carrying out its general assessment which I believe is its first in the seventh or eighth year. This certainly paints a very clear picture of what the current three-member board is faced with now and will be for the next several years. Perhaps we would want to consider some of the reasons for this vast number of appeals. Again, to go back, the general assessment of the City of Edmonton being carried out once in a period of eight years has certainly effected an unexpected kind of change in values with which the ordinary citizen did not keep pace.

The accumulation of value accrued over this period of years is staggering. Land values generally have increased. Land values in the City of Edmonton escalated out of proportion as a result of the demand on available land. Another reason or cause for discontent and the number of appeals is the rezoning of isolated parcels for higher use development in older residential areas, forcing inflated values on single family residential properties, the use of which properties there is no desire to change.

General assessment once in eight years resulted, of course, as I indicated, in such escalated values that many property owners simply were not prepared and are not able to cope with the sudden, extensive property tax increases. The people who are hardest hit by this escalated change are, of course, people in the low-income area, senior citizens who are on fixed incomes and those on average incomes with large numbers of dependants. I see the delay in considering the appeals and the extensive change in the high rise of property values as a double injustice.

Where assessments are incorrect property owners currently must pay a higher tax than should be required of them where the assessments are inaccurate. Thereby they suffer a financial hardship for an extended period of time as a result of the appeal not being considered for a number of months. The single-family dweller, as a result of some of the types of assessments that have been carried out in the older residential areas, is required to pay for the enjoyment of his neighbour who experiences in his success of a higher developed land use of the lot next door.

Although changes must take place in land-use development in established areas, I must maintain that this should not be at the expense of those who are already resident in the area and who do not wish to change the use of their property to anything other than the residential property they currently have. MR. SPEAKER: The Chair has some concern about whether a debate on the equity of assessments in general is relevant to the amendment.

And I fear that if we are going to deal with the equities or inequities of assessments we are going to have a wide-open debate on assessment itself rather than on whether or not the size of the board should be increased. MRS. CHICHAK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, but I felt that this information was relevant to the

section in the amendment under

Section 3 of the amendment which relates to Sections 18 and 19 of the existing Assessment Appeal Board Act. Because of the wider discretionary powers I felt it was necessary to clarify some of the basic reasons why the discretionary powers did need to be increased in line with the change of previous legislation. Relating back to the matter of values and the effect of assessments, I have no doubt that a scheme could be developed to tax, on a fair ratio, property that has realized to the owner an increased value on the sale of such property when the increased value may

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 259 result directly from the increased development of the surrounding area. But only at that time should one be called upon to pay a higher tax. The government, of course, has attempted to assist some of these property owners by removing the education tax portion which is levied against these properties. However, this alone was not enough to assist the lower-income people.

So as a result of that, an amendment was passed in 1973 to The Municipal Taxation Act which enabled the municipalities to pass a by-law, to provide for further classification of residential property into two or more classes on such basis as the municipal council considered proper. To keep in line with that amendment, we have, of course, the amendment in this Bill 13, under

Section 3, and also under Sections 18 and 19. Proper value considerations must be applied in assessment of properties. Therefore to overcome the numerous inequities in this area I am pleased, again, that this bill will provide wider discretionary powers to assist the appeal board. This will enable the board to direct such reassessment as might remove the inequities. Part of that which the bill provides is to be able to direct a municipality to bring about a new assessment.

Applying the amendment of Bill 42 in the Municipal Taxation Amendment Act of 1973, there is a provision for the allowing of different classifications in the residential area. Again the wider discretionary powers contained in

Section 3 of this bill amends Sections 18 and 19 of the Assessment Appeal Board Act. I urge all members to support this bill. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View followed by the hon. Member for Drayton Valley. MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, in making a few comments on the second reading of Bill 13, I wish to state that I agree with your ruling that we are not to debate the whole issue of assessment when we have debate on the bill. On the other hand, if it is permitted, I have no objection to it, but then it does make this a full-fledged debate on the issue, which could be very involved.

I have one observation to make. I think that this is a step in the right direction. There are a lot of grievances about the inability to be heard and the inconvenience of people who wish to appeal or make a presentation, the inconvenience of having to do everything at the convenience of the government, some branch of government, or some board. We have to keep looking more and more to public service. I appreciate the fact that this bill deals only with a specific problem, but the related problem close to this problem is the question of people who have a sincere desire to appeal their assessments.

They are lay people. Many of them discuss this with neighbours and they find out they need to get a lawyer. If they win everything they want, by way of reducing the ir assessment, then it will take them years of reduced taxes to make up for what they have spent. Now this is a social problem; it is a grievance. Many of these people who would like to make a complaint are lay people, they are elderly people, or they are people who have not been in this country too long. When they think it over they decide that rather than risk the expense of legal counsel, they will knuckle under.

We recognize the problem and I believe governments do, but they don't seem to want to do anything about it. I know that it will cost money, but they should set up some means of counselling these people. At least when we have all the departments, everybody wants to do everything for everybody, like consumer affairs or what have you they are helping people in every respect. This is an important social problem. It is an important people problem of assessment of their property.

I would like to urge this government to give serious consideration to setting up some advisory group, a group of lawyers or a group of experts in this field who would be available for ... MR. SPEAKER: Order. MR. YOUNG: I submit that the hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View is clearly trying to make a statement which he should have availed himself the opportunity to make during the Throne Speech and which is totally irrelevant to the particular amendments in this legislation.

260 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, in reply to that point of order, in view of the fact that the opposition majority prevented the Speech from the Throne from proceeding, then maybe I'm just ... MR. SPEAKER: Order. Order please. There is grave doubt whether the hon. member is entitled to reflect on the proceedings of the Assembly in that fashion. In any event, the allegation is untrue. The Chair took the responsibility for putting the question. MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, I suppose I am the only person in this exchange who reflected on the proceedings of the Assembly.

And how was it that I am being ruled out of order on this thing when the hon. member commented on the Speech from the Throne? I think that whatever happens in this House - if somebody makes a remark, I have the right to respond. MR. SPEAKER: Does the member wish to continue his speech? MR. LUDWIG: Yes, Your Honour. I want to make the point that a lot of the opportunities under assessment appeals are not really available to the people because of the cost of making a presentation in appealing your assessment. I know that the procedure is such that lay people do not require counsel.

But in order to present a good case and present a winning case before an appeal board, people who have problems of this type generally require counsel. I wish to reiterate my point that we ought to make some provision, at least some form of clearing house where people who have this kind of problem could be advised of what is the best way and the cheapest way to make their presentation. I am sure a lot of hon. members would agree that this is an existing problem. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. ZANDER: Mr.

Speaker, I think with the bill before us today, you would have to grant a little bit of latitude to enter into the whys and wherefores of the great powers or the expansion of the board. As the hon. Member for Edmonton Norwood has stated, a large number of appeals have come from the courts of revisions throughout the province, particularly in the city of Edmonton; I will deal mainly with

Section 18 and subsection (2). I think, Mr. Speaker, we would have to take a look at why the great number of appeals have come in, and the reason for the amendment to the appeal bill. Mr. Speaker, I believe in looking at what has happened since about four or five years ago, we can only reasonably assume that the inflationary prices placed on improvements and buildings have certainly caused a number of appeals.

There is also the human element of the assessor that comes into play in making up the assessments and placing them on the assessment roll by the secretary-treasurer of the municipality concerned, and thereby the appeals to the courts of revision. Mr. Speaker, if we consider the inflationary costs on land and buildings we can only assume that the percentages that the assessor has to deal with in arriving at the figures, whether they are right or whether they are wrong - he has to take 35 per cent of the replacement value, less the depreciation.

Well, we know that in the last two years the costs of improvements - whether they are single-family dwellings, apartment dwellings, industry or whatever they are - have increased by 30 per cent. So what does an assessor do when he enters a town or city and is assigned a certain part of the city to assess? We has to provide himself with the value of land, and how does he ascertain this value? We has to find out what the recent sales in the area were, and, if he has a number of them, he then computes the amount of the value of the land or the value of the improvements. Now, Mr.

Speaker, in most cases I would say the assessor is absolutely right in his values. But we are dealing with a human element and the case that has come to my knowledge involved two assessors who assessed one town. They divided the town into two parts and one of them took south of 50 Avenue, and one went north. The values that were placed by the two individual assessors were certainly not comparable to the total value they came up with.

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 261 Now, Mr. Speaker, this is why I believe in

Section 18(1): ... the Board is of the opinion that any assessment entered in the rolls of the municipality which is not then under appeal ... . This is the

part I want to stress. I think the hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View has said that people who could least afford it or do not understand the appeal procedure then miss the appeal, and consequently any land that is not under appeal could not have before been dealt with by the Appeal Board. Now, of course, this makes this possible. In order to give you, Mr. Speaker, and this Assembly an illustration, I am talking of the town of Drayton Valley. I just went through the general assessment. The area in question was farmlands and there were well sites on these farmlands.

Now subsequently the town has spilled over into the area and we find that land values there have gone up by about something like 1,000 per cent. Now, Mr. Speaker, we look at a well site that is situated in a residential area, one in a commercial area, and one in an industrial area. These well sites range in value from $20,000 to $40,000. Mr. Speaker, I would say that according to this part of

Section 18, the owner of these lands can appeal on the basis of obsolescence. Mr. Speaker, in dealing with

Section 18 (2): Where the Board is of the opinion that any assessment under appeal is erroneously determined and the evidence adduced at the hearing will not permit determination of a fair and equitable assessment, the Board may quash the assessment and order a new assessment be made in lieu thereof. This is a section, Mr. Speaker, that the Appeal Board could never before deal with.

Therefore, when an assessment is not under appeal the opinion of the Appeal Board is that the values established by the assessor in determining the assessment, although those lands that are not under appeal or the improvements, can be appealed and can be quashed. This, in my opinion, Mr. Speaker, is a step in the right direction, and we can only hope that some of the assessments that were done in the city of Edmonton and in other municipalities throughout the province have regard to the values that were placed upon them.

Arbitrarily we could say that values that have been placed by an assessor are fair on the inflationary basis, but really, is this the true value of the land? This is what the board will now have to determine. If the board can have the power as outlined in

Section 18 (1 ) and (2), and parts of

Section 19, which places the guidelines before them, then I think we can only receive a hearing before a board that will quash an assessment, although not under appeal, and also determine whether the total assessment of the town or city should be redone because of the values that were placed upon them by the assessors. Thank you. DR. PAPROSKI: Mr.

Speaker, any bill, and specifically this bill, The Assessment Appeal Board Amendment Act, 1974, that will help the average citizens, the average workers if you wish, regarding their appeals on property assessment, is certainly very strongly supported by me on behalf of the members of Edmonton Kingsway constituency, and, for that matter, for all Albertans. For these average workers, Mr. Speaker, and all workers in our province, I certainly urge unanimous support by all members of the Legislative Assembly. Mr. Speaker, this is truly another 'people' bill. Thank you. MR. YOUNG: Mr.

Speaker, very briefly, I'd like to indicate strong support of this bill and to commend the speakers who have reflected upon it and given the reasons as succinctly and precisely as they have for the need for a larger assessment appeal board. It has been remarked that property values have been changing very rapidly. That we all know and that, I think, has to be the prime reason. The second reason, which I don't think was mentioned, is that in fact we have a larger population and, because of this larger population, more properties to deal with.

I think it follows that a procedure which was adequate in times past is not now adequate just in terms of the sheer volume of the work. I don't wish to comment upon the wider powers. That has been very adequately covered. MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, just a few comments that I thought possibly could be added to this bill. The expansion of the membership of this board is really planning for the future, as some of the speakers have indicated. Right at this time this may be a need that has been

262 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 experienced in Edmonton, that the inadequate membership on the board could not handle the large number of appeals. However, as one of the speakers has indicated, we understand that these general reassessments are due to come in from some other parts of the province, and the city of Calgary, I'm told, in another two years' time. What has happened here in Edmonton to the Edmonton taxpayers is no doubt going to be happening in the other cities where there will be many, many appeals. The only other comment I wanted to indicate was in

Section 18, where a person may be able at least to depend on the board for a decision and that then a reassessment will be made, rather than having to go through the legal channels to get the reassessment as has been required in the past. MR. HINMAN: Mr. Speaker, this is a necessary bill and a good approach. However, I don't like the idea of two boards being made out of one board, or three boards being made out of one board, and all sitting at the same time.

If this is the correct procedure, and if we need a number of these so we can handle the number of appeals, would it not then be possible to revise this approach? I don't know whether the court would be the right word, but you could provide for courts of appeal. The government could then nominate 8, 10 or 12, if you like, assessors whom they think are eminently qualified to hear appeals and to make recommendations. Then the recommendations of the two or three, or whatever members were appointed to hear a certain group of appeals, would report to the full board.

The full board would then either approve their decision or change it. This is not exactly something new, but the idea that there is a board, and that when you get a hearing you only get a hearing of two of the board - and every board of course is made up of people of a little different approach, a little different understanding, a little different attitude - you have no assurance that you will get the same treatment from one pair as from another.

On the other hand, if it were like our court system where you had a panel of people who were eligible, and from these two or three could be appointed and they in turn reported to the full board, then I think people would have a feeling that they were getting a really just hearing in two ways. First they would have the recommendation of the people who heard their appeal and then they would have the advantage of the consideration of the full board. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, following what the hon.

Member for Cardston just mentioned, I would refer to the cases where the legal fraternity, when they have a case, many times hold it over in order to get it in front of a certain judge, because they find that judge is more sympathetic or more knowledgeable, or something. One of the dangers I see in this type of thing is the same thing happening. As the hon. member mentioned, everybody has different temperaments, different personalities and so on, and there is a danger, if it doesn't go back to the full board, of this type of thing happening in the case of assessments. MR.

SPEAKER: May the hon. member close the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MRS. CHICHAK: Mr. Speaker, I wish to comment just briefly on some of the points raised by the hon. members. First of all, I want to thank all of them for their participation and their indication of support. I'd like to comment on the suggestion made by the hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View. We suggests there be provision made for the public to receive some sort of counselling - assisting citizens who find themselves in a position wishing to file appeals of their assessments, in submitting their appeals in the most effective form.

I must say I agree and must compliment him on that suggestion. I think we have long recognized that the legal costs to many citizens who are already in a difficult position financially, insofar as their income is concerned, are an

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 263 additional hardship when, in order to make a most effective case before the appeal board, they find it necessary to retain legal counsel to act on their behalf. So I think that suggestion has a great deal of merit, and I am sure the minister under whom this bill comes, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, will give that suggestion some real consideration. With regard to the points raised by the hon.

Member for Drayton Valley wherein he cited examples of some of the improper kinds of assessments and difficulties experienced by property owners, in relation to the types of property the hon. Member for Drayton Valley was referring to I am sure the hon. minister will bring to the attention of the members of the board these kinds of difficulties for their awareness.

No doubt the kind of consideration that would need to be given in those appeals is certainly not of the norm where we ordinarily consider and look at basically residential properties or properties that do not have difficulties or variations that affect their assessments other than the basic building constructed improvement and the land itself. I also wish to thank the Member for Edmonton Kingsway for his support and for again drawing attention particularly to the issue that the greatest injustice is experienced or felt by those who really have a financial difficulty. I also wish to thank the hon.

Members for Jasper Place and Beverly for their additional support and comments. With regard to the suggestions put forward by the hon. Member for Cardston, I have some concern. Initially, I am not sure I agree with this suggestion for the reason that if the matter of appeals is brought under the jurisdiction of the courts, immediately I can see a cost increase in handling these appeals. This will certainly soar because of, I think, the more complicated mechanism that would essentially wind up being applied.

As well, I would have some concern as to whether, in fact, the hearings on these appeals could continue as consistently as they do now and the number of them would increase by having an increased board. I would have some concern about the availability of the individuals who might be selected on a list and their consistency in maintaining the information and the kind of consideration that they would have to give and be constantly available. I would have some concern as to whether under this kind of system the appeals could still be heard at the locations as they are now.

For instance, the current appeal board sits in the City Hall because the information in regard to the assessments is computerized. It is on their machines, on their records, and they are able to go to the City Hall and work right at the place where all the information is available. And it minimizes the kind of material that would have to be pulled, assembled and reproduced if, in fact, the board could not go to some of these locations as it is required. So I have some concern about that. However, I would not wish to say that the suggestion has no merit.

Perhaps it is one that should be considered, looked into, and its feasibility and its effectiveness in relation to what we are ... that may exist with an extended board and the present procedures. In this regard, I wish as well to thank the hon. Member for Drumheller for the comments he raised. I think those are the only comments I wish to make at this time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [The motion was carried. Bill No. 13 was read a second time.] Bill No. 15 _The Alberta Housing Amendment Act, 1974 M R. KING: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to move that Bill No. 15, The Alberta Housing Amendment Act, 1974, be now read a second time. The last time I said that to you I sat down right away without giving any words of explanation about the bill. So maybe I could take a few moments now to explain to the House what's involved. It's part of a two-pronged attack on the housing problem.

The Attorney General said yesterday the government had no intentions of introducing a landlord-tenant act, but I might feel moved to do it privately, myself, later on, in which case that, in conjunction with this bill, would be of assistance to the housing problem in the province. I am sorry the hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View isn't here to appreciate that.

264 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 Mr. Speaker, the bill encompasses three areas of change. Two of them are very straightforward, and the third I would like to take just a few moments to discuss in some detail. First, the bill changes the fiscal year of the corporation to coincide with the fiscal year of the provincial government. This is done in Sections 6 and 7 of the Act. The reason for this change is twofold. First, it is obviously a convenience, both to the Provincial Auditor and to the government.

And secondly, it will enable us to report various housing data on a comparative basis and do this more easily and more accurately if we are comparing comparable years of activity. The second area of change is in the composition and the delineation of the functions of the board. This is accomplished in Sections 3 and 4 of the act you have in front of you. The office of the chief executive officer, formerly designated as the executive director of the corporation, is now designated as the presidency.

And this chief executive officer, or the position of the chief executive officer, is formally recognized in the legislation. The two other things which are done in terms of the function of the board are, first of all, to recognize formally that the chief executive officer serves during the pleasure of the minister responsible and in that way makes his position comparable to that of the deputy minister of a line department.

And secondly, the chairmanship of the board is extended in that it is provided that if the minister as chairman and the vice-chairman cannot be in attendance at meetings, the meetings might still be held under a recognizable chairmanship. Now the third set of changes, Mr. Speaker, are the ones which I think are most interesting to all members of the House. These are the changes which are consequential to the recent amendments made in the federal House of Commons and Senate to the National Housing Act. Generally speaking, they respect three federal programs or program changes in the National Housing Act.

The first are the neighbourhood improvement programs. The second respect low-cost, non-profit housing, and the third respect residential rehabilitation programs. In this regard I might say that Alberta was the first provincial jurisdiction in Canada to sign an agreement with the federal corporation, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, respecting the development of these programs within the provincial jurisdiction. The amendments we have before us to The Alberta Housing Corporation Act provide for the requisite municipal borrowing, for greater flexibility in the funding of these programs.

They provide for having an electorate in the municipality which is aware of the proposals which are being put forward under these programs. The result of this, I think, is to open up some really exciting possibilities with respect to housing in the province. The federal legislation provides the opportunity for additional federal money. It indicates an apparent willingness, subject to negotiation, to have the province designate specific programs in the province and administer them.

This, I might say, is a considerable break from what has been the past practice of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation in wanting to be involved directly in the administration and the designation of these programs within the province. The third thing that I think has developed is the establishment of some realistic and very desirable criteria for determining which programs are going to be assisted and to what extent, criteria respecting minimum standards, participation by municipalities, and citizen participation.

The fourth thing that I think is worthwhile is the innovation that is provided for, both in the federal legislation and in this enabling legislation. Mr. Speaker, I would conclude. I would be interested in the comments of any of the hon. members. I have always felt that the legislation, The Alberta Housing Act, of this province is the best provincial complementary legislation that exists in Canada. We have in our legislation a vehicle to do some of the most progressive things in the country with respect to housing.

I firmly believe that the amendments we have before us today are going to improve a bill that is already the best in Canada. I'd be interested in the comments of the hon. members and would attempt to answer any questions that they raise at the conclusion of the debate. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. NOTLEY: Just a few very brief comments on Bill No. 15. May I just say first of all that I support the bill. The first two principles the hon. member outlined, the changes in the fiscal year and the composition of the board, are really non-controversial, so they don't really require any debate by this Legislature.

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 265 The third area, consequential amendments as a result of new federal housing programs, is in my judgment the one area where it would probably be worthwhile if we had some debate on the principle of Bill No. 15. Certainly the changes proposed by Bill No. 15 which are complementary to the new programs from Ottawa can and should be implemented and certainly merit the support of all members, and I support them.

The one area that I would raise, perhaps more in the form of a question to elicit views from the member who introduced the bill, is the role that the government in Alberta, especially the Alberta Housing Corporation, foresees for co-operative housing. I have had some experience in dealing with people who have embarked upon co-operative housing ventures, Mr. Speaker, in the province, and it's their view that the Alberta Housing Corporation pays lip service to co-operative housing, but is not really encouraging it.

I would be interested in the member, when he sums up debate, commenting on what role he sees for co-operative housing in the province. When we talk about neighbourhood improvement programs or rehabilitation programs, one point he raised in debate is certainly important and should be underlined. That is the role of citizen participation, not just participation by the municipalities - I think that's important; there is clearly no doubt about that - but participation by the people in the community, participation so that they, in fact, have some genuine input into the decisions that are made.

I think there is a real problem with many of our schemes, government schemes, where we have well-intentioned bureaucrats who are very knowledgeable in the field who come to the conclusion that thus and so should be done. Participation really amounts to no more than one or two meetings and that's it. I think that really isn't good enough. What is required in participation is an ongoing process by which the people in the area have some real input in the decision-making process from start to finish. But by and large, Mr. Speaker, I think that Bill No. 15 is an excellent piece of legislation and I support it. MR.

SPEAKER: May the hon. member close the debate? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the comments that the hon. member made. I, too, have some familiarity with the co-operative housing situation in the province and would like to make a few comments about it because I see it as being an increasingly important component of housing development in the province. But the fact of the matter is that, to this province, and to western Canada generally, indeed to most of North America, co- operative housing is a relatively new development.

In Alberta we have one co-operative housing development in Calgary which has been established just for about three years. We have one which is now just beginning to come on stream in Edmonton, the Sturgeon Valley Housing Co-op. I think that its newness, as well as the admitted fact that the Alberta Housing Corporation has been involved with a number of other concerns during the past 18 months, goes some distance towards explaining why co-operative housing organizations haven't felt more encouraged in the recent past.

I would say, though, that it is obvious that with every co-operative housing development that does go ahead, we create firm precedents that are going to make it that much more easy for succeeding housing co-operatives. The Sturgeon Valley Housing Co-operative, for example, in its relationship with the Alberta Housing Corporation, has established some firm precedents for mixed income, mixing mortgages, financial assistance, both from the Alberta Housing Corporation and from the CMHC.

I think what the Sturgeon Valley Housing Co-op has done, in cooperation with AHC, is really going to make it markedly easier for future co-operatives in the province. With respect to citizen participation and citizen input, I would agree with you as well that it is extremely important. I think that implicit in both the federal legislation and the provincial legislation is the recognition that there has to be citizen participation.

In the two neighbourhoods that have been designated for assistance under the NIP agreement, Canora in Edmonton and Inglewood-Ramsay in Calgary, I think it's clear from their historical development that it was citizen input right in those neighbourhoods that got them into the position they are in today of being designated and of being eligible for assistance from the municipal government, the province, and the federal government.

The one thing I would like to say - and I don't mean by this to shed the responsibility of the provincial government - but I think, practically speaking, if we are sincere about citizen input and citizen involvement, the level of government which is

266 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 most responsible for seeing that happen is the municipal level of government. Practically speaking, under the federal legislation which we are complementing in this situation, it is the responsibility of the municipal government to first make a recommendation to the province about what neighbourhood is going to be designated. If that recommendation is ratified by the provincial government then that is how it goes ahead.

But the initiating level of government is the municipality, and I think that in this case, and in many others, if we are really serious about citizen development, citizen participation, the people who are going to have to make the first firm commitments, the first firm sharing of power and authority, are going to have to be the people in the municipal government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [The motion was carried. Bill No. 15 was read a second time.] Bill No. 5 The Industrial Development Repeal Act MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of Bill No. 5, The Industrial Development Repeal Act.

In prefacing my remarks in regard to this repeal I would ask the hon. members who are interested in talking about the strategy of the Department of Industry and Commerce in regard to sector developments such as steel and petrochemicals, that the Estimates discussion or the budget debate might afford a better opportunity. Having said that, I think the House deserves some explanation for this repeal, while it is housekeeping. First of all I might say that this Act dates back some number of years to January 11, 1946, and has been inoperative under the previous government as well as ours since May 26 or 27, 1970.

Basically this Act covered the need for a director or legislation to effect an industrial development board. It has become redundant because of the reorganization of the Department of Industry and Commerce, and secondly, of course, through modern attrition in regard to communities having their own industrial officers. Mr. Speaker, the need for the Industrial Development Repeal Act is very simple. The functions performed under the Act are now carried on under other enactments.

I might just say, for the information of the House while I am speaking about this repeal, since The Industrial Development Act now serves no useful purpose we see little need for its existence. However, Mr. Speaker, it affords me an opportunity to review briefly with the House some of the reasons for the changes taking place with regard to our regional activities within our department. Only two branches that were developed as part of our 1971 Department of Industry and Commerce remain with us.

There is no reference in the 1971 organization of industry regarding the following: 1. the Regional Services Branch; 2. the Industrial Development Sectors; 3. the International Marketing Branches 4. the Transport, Research and Development Divisions. I will be discussing in greater detail the need for the new structure of my department and its programs during our review of the Estimates. However, permit me to point out a few areas that we have been pursuing to date, as a strategy. We have established some basic industries and strategies in these regards.

We have identified some major sectors such as: petrochemicals, forest products, metal fabrication, service industries, steel, metal, the film industry, manufacturing and fabrication, et cetera. The purpose of these sectors is to ensure that orderly economic development and diversification occurs within the industrial base of Alberta. The main thrusts have occurred in the areas of petrochemical and steel, of course, and I alluded to that in my opening comments, that we would have maybe a full discussion and debate on that during the Estimates.

We are attempting to assess rural economic development by a method that is being pursued in the following way: by a regional program breaking the province up into nine districts, and by having within those nine districts an officer of the Department of Industry and Commerce coordinated with the Chambers of Commerce and businessmen within those communites, so that opportunity inventories may be listed as to what is indigenous or what is capable of being either expanded as a service vehicle or developed within those nine areas. Of course, this is predicated on a self-help program.

Unless the people within the breakdown of those geographic areas within the province want to do something themselves, then nothing is going to be done. To coordinate these groups within the towns and in those areas within those nine sectors we have a new and exciting concept that as a matter of fact was advanced by the hon. member from the other side representing Drumheller, in regard to smaller towns getting together as a ...

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 267 [Interjections] ...Just getting used to this now ... as a small integral group in which they would relate their services and therefore, Mr. Speaker, be able to succeed as a group rather than as individuals, possibly. As the present situation now exists in the regional areas, regional offices are located in Medicine Hat, Calgary, Lacombe, St. Paul, Grande Prairie, Edson, Peace River and Edmonton. In the 1974-75 Estimates, if they are approved, offices will be established in southwestern Alberta, east-central Alberta, Edmonton rural and Calgary rural.

I might go on and mention a few things in transportation because in the infrastructure of making rural and diversifying our activities in the economy and the qualities of life that we search for, for all Albertans - in regard to that we recognise that there are certain forces in infrastructures that must be developed.

Of course, apart from water and sewage which our honourable colleague has announced - a very progressive program last year affording that particular problem to be overcome in smaller communities - is one of transportation and one I've alluded to previously, the need for a more understanding resource of capital, both in the debt, in the equity and in the risk areas. Also in that program to diversify and give equal opportunity both in the quality and in the quantity of life to Albertans, we must address ourselves to the facilities of research, R and Ds and areas such as that. Mr.

Speaker, I have briefly mentioned some of the programs of my department and those agencies responsible, such as AOC and the Alberta Research Council that are involved with us. It was my intention to make the House aware of only a few of these programs on a regional basis so the members might have some idea that we are indeed progressing that makes this particular Act I have seconded today redundant, andI would ask fort he support of its repeal. MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, I too would like to make a few comments concerning this bill.

I notice that the hon. minister had almost a compulsion to bare his soul about his departmento n this very small bill and I hope I'm not treading on forbidden territory when I feel that he probably had wanted to give it elsewhere, but now is as good a time as ever, I suppose. It's interesting when we review a department like the hon. minister's that there are many things that we like to know and the hon. minister is quite anxious to tell us all that he would like us to know. All is well and there is great prosperity. Everybody is doing fine.

But I think we should ask him to give us some information that perhaps he is not too anxious to give. In watching the performance of that department I get the impression, Mr. Speaker, that when we ask for information that the government doesn't want to give, then we suspect that something may be wrong, and we have a job to do then. We run it down and find out it isn't as hard to get information as we thought it was in the beginning, and it doesn't hurt as much when they come after we sort of press them on it.

But when the minister talks about the great expansion programs and the progressive things they have in mind for this province, he should also tell us about the fact that, for some reason perhaps best known to him, we had 829 bankruptcies in Alberta in 1973. I am not putting that up as a disaster. That's the other side of the picture. But it's an indication that prosperity isn't available to everybody. I would like the hon. minister, when be gets an opportunity - maybe on Title and

Preamble - to tell us whether the businesses, the firms and individuals who are getting loans under his department, are having some difficulties, whether some are going broke. I am not in any way knocking the need for that fund and the need for what he is doing, but we want to know the whole picture, and for him to tell us whether there have been any bankruptcies with firms that have got these loans - whether some are going broke or whether some are coming back for more money, or whether all's well and everybody is prosperous.

I would also like the minister to give us some clear indication of the policy of his department in this regard, because we hear that a lot of the funds loaned through the Alberta Opportunity Company are going into the tourist business. We want to know whether it's going to areas where perhaps conventional funds are available.

We want to know whether some of the people who established businesses in the tourist area - such as motels, motor inns and catering areas, who got their money the conventional way and worked for years and years to build up a business - are now competing with lower interest rates borrowed by their competition in business. Are we creating inequities? Are we lending money to businesses which are competing with other businesses that are struggling to make ends meet, and making their efforts a little harder - making it harder for them to continue to earn a living?

When we talk about industrialization, we are hinting about how wonderful it is that we've got great things in store for the province, but we have to see whether the people of

268 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 this province or elsewhere will benefit from industrialization and whether we are not actually pushing something that will not be able to maintain itself in the next 10, 20 or 30 years. We do have the advantage of energy but not much else by way of resources for industrialization. Of course we have lumber. We have certain natural resources. But for industrialization we would have to import some of the raw materials.

What happens when our energy position should not be quite as favourable as it is today, looking down the line 20 or 30 years, although the amount of energy we have appears to be good for as far down as one can see? The question of transportion. This issue is not something that the hon. minister or the Tories invented, Mr. Speaker. This was fought very hard by this government and by the hon. Member for Drumheller, Mr. Taylor, effectively and relentlessly for years. And the attitude of the West towards this inequity was always the same.

In fact, to be accurate, the greatest fight for some equality in transportation changes was launched by the Social Credit government when the Conservatives had a big majority in parliament. And we got nothing. The great champion, the Rt. Hon. John Diefenbaker, wasn’t able to swing the Conservatives from other parts of Canada to give us a compassionate hearing. So we are going through the same exercise now that we did many times. It appears that the best voice we ever had in Ottawa for some equal treatment for the West was when we sent MPs to Ottawa who were not of the two old-line parties.

We wish the minister well and we are behind him in his fight, but when you take credit for what you’re going to do, let's look and see what you achieve. We are with you in this fight; we always have been and we will continue to fight for equal treatment for the West long after perhaps the hon. minister and his government have departed from this place. When we talk about inequality in transportation, we have to be sincere about it. We have inequalities existing in this province. I am sure the people from Peace River would like to be treated equally in costs of transporting goods to those around Edmonton.

So we have to make sure that when we say something like this we are going to help all these towns and all the out-of-the-way areas to get some kind of equality. For instance, if a man is raising cattle one mile from the Edmonton city limits he probably does better in the profit he makes than the man who is raising cattle 300 miles north. AN HON. MEMBER: I don't know of any. MR. LUDWIG: So we have to look to see if maybe we could stretch this equality of treatment in transportation to everybody. Maybe this is being done.

I hope the minister is looking at it, but if he isn't, then we could always practise what we preach. If anybody can afford to extend this kind of service to other areas, this province can. Also, when we look at industrialization, we have to look far enough ahead to make sure we are not creating more problems than we are solving. Ontario is very heavily industrialized and has cheaper transportation. It has a local market and all of the advantages that any industrialized area in Canada can hope for, but the cost of living there is no more favourable than here. Houses are almost beyond reach.

You can't purchase them unless you have some ready cash available. Pollution is a serious problem. Nobody seems to want to leave here and go there because they are industrialized. They have created problems - transportation, pollution, cost problems - and are we going that way? When the hon. minister talks about perhaps decentralization, let's not take credit for something that is merely good copy. The results are insignificant, with Calgary and Edmonton in particular growing as rapidly as ever.

When we talk about decentralization, I am not saying that we ought not to try it, but let's not confuse pronouncement with achievement. It's a good attitude. It's a good intent but we haven't done anything really to show that there is some kind of a beneficial reversal of population from the bigger places to smaller places. I am sure that some of the things the hon. minister is doing in lending money will keep some people from coming in perhaps a bit longer, but I am also of the opinion that every successful business in a smaller town sooner or later can develop and establish its business in a city.

So we are not really achieving very much in the decentralization or in the growth of population when we talk about lending money to areas remote from the cities to help them develop. It's almost like force-feeding these industries and businesses, hoping that they will manage to develop and keep the population there. I was once told by a lady who lives in a town up north that there are two reasons why people leave small towns. One is because they can't afford to stay there and the other one is that they have made enough money to get out. The matter of decentralizing the

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 269 government and trying to decentralize industry is good talk, but in the final analysis, if you weigh the real efforts, there isn't too much to show. Edmonton and Calgary will still continue to grow much faster than the rest of the province put together. I am not criticizing the efforts, but let's look back and see what we have done. With those few remarks, Mr. Speaker, I believe the hon. minister has been given some questions. I'm concerned whether he is really looking carefully at the bankruptcies.

When I state there were 829 in Alberta in 1973 that's more than the two previous years put together. A lot of these bankruptcies involved individuals - average individuals, maybe not in business, but it doesn't matter to me whether it is a business or an individual, because a business is owned by individuals. Sometimes the amounts are small - the amounts involved in the bankruptcy are small - but nevertheless when you have 829 people, or businesses, that have gone bankrupt last year, the trend is that it is getting worse.

The concern I have, and I would like to hear the hon. minister's view on this, is that many people who have gone broke do not bother making application to be declared bankrupt. As I have stated before, is this the visible tip of the iceberg? If it is, we can crow all we like about how great things are in Alberta, and there is a high level of prosperity. I'm saying that in those areas where people are managing in business, and are thriving, they don't need that Alberta Opportunity Company at all. They can well do without it, they are prospering and have been without it.

But let's look at whether we are not creating problems that are hurting some of the businesses that exist now, or whether we are actually encouraging people to get into a business that conventional money wouldn't consider supporting. As I have stated, I supported the lending but we have to be discreet and we have to be very attuned to what is in fact happening. Yes, as some hon. member says, open. That goes without any discussion because the hon. minister proclaims an open operation and we demand it, so between the two of us if we don't disagree, it will continue to be open.

Sometimes I have my doubts as to the real intent of the declaration of openness by this government. [Interjections] MR. LUDWIG: Are you still here, Warrack? AN HON. MEMBER: He is still awake. MR. LUDWIG: Mr. Speaker, I believe that when we talk about industrialization we ought to get something from the more academic side of the problem as to how industrialization will affect our environment and the beautiful country that we have now.

Are we not going to be importing problems by paying to industrialize or sort of loading the odds in favour of the industrialization when the economy itself does not really attract this industrialization? I believe that the hon. Minister of Lands and Forests has a place in this particular problem, and I hope that he is as informed about the negative aspects of industrialization as he is about some other matters. So, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the hon. minister now has an opportunity to finish a speech that, I believe, he intended to give several days ago, and I hope he answers my questions. MR. WILSON: Mr.

Speaker, in participating in the debate on the Industrial Development Repeal Act, I'd first like to say that it is a very laudable thing when a cabinet minister does away with some legislation. It seems that we concentrate far more time on introducing legislation than on doing away with it, and this 'extralimitary' legislation that can be removed from the Statutes certainly should be done. I just wish that the minister had picked a few acts that were much thicker. Perhaps, Mr.

Speaker, when the minister closes the debate, he would just set the record straight on exactly which enactments cover the various points contained in Sections 6 and 7 of the act. I think that we should have on record exactly which areas are presently carrying on the role enumerated in Sections 6 and 7 of the act. I think also it would be useful when the minister closes the debate, Mr. Speaker, if he would just make a comment about staff. Is there any staff involved? Is anybody being laid off or demoted, or [having a] salary cut, or things of that nature?

Is there any extraordinary expense involved in closing down the Industrial Development Board and the operation covered under this act? I think it would just help to tidy up the situation if the minister would elaborate on those few points.

270 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 Thank you. MR. DIXON: Mr. Speaker, there are just two points I would like to speak on today. One is to the minister. Is there a real problem to try to approve the relationship between the loans and new jobs created? They found out in Ontario in their department that it was very difficult to do that. They have switched their loans in favour of the slow-growth areas with the idea that they will have a better idea whether their loans are really doing what they are intended to do.

There has been some thought here, and I would like to leave this with the minister when he is talking about industrial development. There seems to be a tendency on behalf of this government, not only just the loan board but the government itself, to take non- polluting industries out of the cities into the rural areas, which to me is really a step backward. I can think of an example, the moving of the Manchester Shops out of the city. This is a non-polluting industry and all it is doing is just disrupting the staff that works there and making it just that much more inconvenient.

Basically what I'm trying to impress on the minister is that I think it is very difficult to relate jobs created by the loans, which is originally what we had in mind. I'm just wondering if the minister could enlarge on that aspect of it. Ontario is going into the slow-growth areas with lower interest rates and in some cases with a moratorium on repaying the loan for a five-year period. To me this would be a constructive way; I think we could point to a real effort to help the areas in Alberta that really need the help, more so than some of the urban centres because money is available in the urban centres.

I'm not just referring to Calgary and Edmonton, but I'm sure you could say the same thing about Grande Prairie, Red Deer or Lethbridge - that type of urban development. So I would like the minister to relate to the House whether there is a flaw in the fact that with the loans there is no way of really attaching the employment benefits in the number of jobs created by the loan fund. MR. SPEAKER: Would the hon. minister conclude the debate? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. PEACOCK: Well, Mr.

Speaker, in reply to some of the questions that have been raised in this particular debate, I would first of all address myself to the questions that the hon. Member for Calgary Mountain View raised in regard to bankruptcies. I think this is a statistical situation which I would welcome answering, having the statistics in this regard, at the time of my estimates. I don't think we want to philosophize by stating whether they are individuals or whether they are companies - as we all know, under The Companies Act now, a lot of professional people incorporate.

As a result I don't know whether it is a reflection on our department in that area, whether a lawyer goes out of business, or a doctor or whatever it might be. But in any event, I think so we can identify where the bankruptcies exist and why they have increased, a full analysis on that, we will undertake to answer at the time of the Estimates. I might say as far as the AOC is concerned, there has been no indication and it certainly doesn't indicate to us that there is any trend starting in this regard.

As far as the ability to loan money, I think that we have had this discussion many times in the House, as to whether it should be in the urban area, whether it should be at a conventional rate, or lesser or higher, whether it should be in the rural area, whether it should be at a lower rate in the urban area or at a lower rate than the conventional lender.

As to who gets the loans, how you define and set up criteria so that it satisfies each and everybody within the Province of Alberta, is indeed a job that I don't think we have the expertise or capability - either on this side of the House or on that side of the House or, for that matter, in the business community of Alberta or Canada - to be able to define to the satisfaction of a political debate who should and who should not receive loans. I think we can set up general principles of loans, that the AOC is a people-oriented situation.

The idea and purpose of it is to fill a void that the conventional lender that's insensitive to the environmental demands of a position of a person in a location cannot obtain it normally from a conventional source, either because the rules and regulations the conventional lender might have are too stringent for the opportunity that

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 271 this particular person has in this particular location, or because the historical background in history of the conventional lender has had no record, and so consequently he won't take the chance. So for me ever to defend what the AOC does in this House is no more or less than the capability in the best interests of the people of Alberta and the person we have chosen, and the person he has chosen in order to guide the moneys that you, as a Legislature, have voted to be invested in the future economic growth of this province.

Now the hon. member alluded to the fact that we're high in energy and that, as a consequence, our efforts are directed towards energy. I would say that they aren't a natural resource naturally. That is the main thrust, the advantage that we have within the Province of Alberta and certainly they are directed towards that. But not all our economic and industrial activities are directed towards just depleting resources.

I might point out that the previous government and we, in conjunction with carrying on that program, have moved - along with my hon. colleague from the Department of Lands and Forests - into the development of exploring and utilization to a far greater extent the timber resources of this province, in particular in the area of Aspen, and many other uses. So I say that we are looking - and I just give that as an example into a much broader spectrum of a diversified base than the depleting resource or the energy resources he alludes to.

As far as transportation is concerned, I must concur that, like the weather, we are not the be-all, the end-all, to satisfy what the transportation inequities might be in the Province of Alberta, or in Alberta in context of Canada. But I would say this, Mr.

Speaker, that I think we have had in the last two years the opportunity, through the Premier and through the Government of Alberta, to bring forth to the provinces of western Canada, in the proper perspective, the whole problem of transportation, not only as it affects us in rail and inequities of freight rates, but what the systems, the total systems problem might be today in 1974, and 20 years from now.

And so we have brought about mechanisms and opportunities, such as WESTAC, that will address themselves to the systems study for today and tomorrow, so that surely if we were all privileged to come back and visit or sit in this House 20 years hence, we won't be talking about the same problem as has existed in Canada since almost 1883. Now, in answering a couple of the questions from the hon. Member for Bow Valley in regard to Sections 6 and 7 of the repeal, I thought I had covered it in my

preamble in stating that the present regional program under the direction of Mr. Broadfoot and the nine regional officers - providing you approve the Estimates that we have coming before you - in cooperation with the Chambers of Commerce in those respective areas dividing up the nine sectors of the province, would have in effect replaced what this act intended to do in regard to having an industrial development board.

It has not replaced anybody; it has not released anybody because there was nobody involved in this particular act other than that it had decreed that the Deputy Minister would function as the chairman of this industrial board. And it was never enforced. I suggested that it had been redundant or at least not exercised some 15 months before we took office, which indicates that the previous government was not too enthused about it either. To answer the question in regard to

Section 7, whether we are replacing the facility and whether we have it, yes. I think we stated that what we have is an ability now, a built-in capability, of expertise that will assist the regions in taking an inventory of what they in their own particular districts are most capable of developing, expanding or initiating in regard to the diversification and the employment opportunities for those districts. I might allude to one other thing. The hon.

Member for Calgary Mountain View stated that he thought it was inevitable that there was a mass exodus from the rural area into the urban area anyway, and what were we doing about it, and what we were doing about it was really just giving lip service. You know, that's just shocking - just absolutely shocking. MR. LUDWIG: Order. On a point of order, I believe the minister misunderstood me. I didn't say "a mass exodus". I never used those words at all. AN HON. MEMBER: You did so. MR. LUDWIG: Not in any sense of the word, and the minister ought to be a little more careful about how he kicks words around.

272 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, I just think it is shocking to even allude to anything ... MR. LUDWIG: On a point of order, it is shocking that the minister couldn't speak the truth. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. The hon. member was certainly in order in explaining a part of his speech which might have been misunderstood. But to get into the area of dealing with possible untruths by other members of the Assembly is getting into an area which I would not wish to see the hon. member enter. MR. PEACOCK: Mr.

Speaker, surely one of the pursuits that we're looking for in regard to the efforts we might put forth in the economic and industrial development area, in conjunction with those other parts of government, is to search for quality as well as quantity of life. And surely there are advantages for people who would like to livei n rural partso f Alberta, if they have equal opportunity to attain the standard of living that the rest of the urban areas of Alberta have afforded them.

All we are suggesting is that those inequities that relate between the urban or the centralized area and the rural area be somewhat equalized so that the people of Alberta would have the opportunity to choose and not be forced into making a move because of economic reasons. Mr. Speaker, I think that any of the other problems in regard to what the hon. Member for Calgary Millican brought up concerning moving non-pollution industries into urban areas - I just can't answer that question because there is no intent on behalf of this government or our departments to do that.

I think if there is a case in point he is referring to, that it was by the particular company's own free will and accord that it decided to move from an urban area into a rural area. As far as the direction of the funds are concerned, in how to monitor the effectiveness and the results of what you do with the money that is passed through AOC hands into the recipients', the would-be individual or company, I think this is a difficult problem.

As he suggested, it has been a concern, a concern to us and a concern to other governments, and I would be more interested in maybe speaking on that issue further during the Estimates. [The motion was carried. Bill No. 5 was read a second time.] Bill No. 16 The Forest Development Research Trust Fund Act MR. TRYNCHY: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move second reading, seconded by the hon. Member for Athabasca, of Bill No. 16, being The Forest Development Research Trust Fund Act. The purpose of this bill, Mr.

Speaker, is to enable the government, along with industry, to work together to improve timber management and forest production. I'm hoping, Mr. Speaker, that the necessary funds will be available very shortly so we can get on with the task of improving our forest reserves, which I might say at this time are very essential to all Albertans, now and in the future. At the present, Mr. Speaker, there is no mechanism for acceptance of contributions or allocations of funds from industry or free enterprise for producers of lumber.

There is also no mechanism for the allocation of government funds for such a research program. The Canadian Forest Service has been the prime forest research agency in Alberta and has funded and coordinated the bulk of research to date. The province has, to a limited extent, cooperated in certain areas, but there has been no participation by the forest industry. In looking at this bill, Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to see that there have been six appointments to the commission and there is room for at least five or more members.

I would suggest at this time that the hon. minister would possibly appoint members from the industry. I'm sure there are people in the industry, such as at Whitecourt, Fox Creek, Slave Lake, Hinton, Grande Prairie, down in the southern part of the province, who, with their technology, could work with the government to provide research for the development of more forest areas and timber supplies.

March 15, 1974 ALBERTA HANSARD 273 I'd like also to say that possibly at this time they could appoint a farmer-logger to take

part in this commission. I think they work hand in hand with government and industry in timber areas close to the farming communities on the eastern slopes. I'd like to suggest that possibly we could have these farmers go into tree farming. One person we should have on this board is possibly a member of the Department of the Environment. Even though 55 per cent of the province is owned by the government in land, some of it is in lease in grazing areas. But the balance of it is timber, approximately 50 per cent of which is in the wetland areas.

What I mean by "wetland" is areas that are now not productive, what you might call wasteland. It's this area that I think we should be looking at very seriously. I think we should engage the Department of the Environment to possibly have some draining done and have this area put into production. Because when we look at the figures of total lumber production, total sales and what we have in reserves, I think we are fast moving to where we might run out of timber. These wetland areas, as I mentioned, cover a vast part of our province in the north and I really believe that great research has to be done there.

Also the funds that are necessary might be in large sums. I would encourage the government and the hon. minister to move fast in this direction because when we listen to some of the members on both sides of the House and hear speeches on the housing shortage - mind you the lumber supply in housing is not that great, but we must have lumber, and in order to facilitate the acquisition of a house by the working man, the young married couple and so on, then we must have timber supplies. It mentioned in the bill that the members should meet at least once a year.

I would like to see them possibly meet at least once a month because this is a research program, and if we get it off the ground and move it in the way I think it should be moved, we'll have a lot of work for all the members. When I speak of the wetland areas, I think also of this development for another reason, and that's the reason where a lot of our forest reserves adjacent to the agriculture lands are tied up for wood lots, timber reserves and so on. I think if we could improve the wetland areas of Alberta we can move this land that is now in the wood lot areas into agriculture.

We all know there is a demand for agriculture in Alberta. There is a demand for it in Canada and in the world. So in the areas such as Rocky Mountain House - well, you can go right to the U.S. border, stretching across to the North. In my area especially - and I could mention the Peers area, the Edson area, the Whitecourt area, even Barrhead and Swan Hills where these forest reserves are tying up land that could be used for agriculture - we could move into the wetland areas or other lands that are not capable of producing agriculture and develop them and make them more productive in our timber products.

I am just looking at a speech here made by the hon. Leader of the Opposition that housing has created a number of problems in marriage breakdowns and delinquency. I'm sure that if we get this research program going, possibly we can slow down the breakdown of marriages and delinquency and stabilize the family as mentioned by the hon. Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, in reviewing the economic outlook of Alberta, it is interesting to note that in 1972 there was a production of 580 million board feet of lumber produced in Alberta. In 1973 this was increased to 680 million board feet.

This just proves the point I mentioned a while ago, that if we don't have a research program, reforest our areas where it can produce the timber, we could be running out of forest products. We export approximately 55 per cent of our lumber, and even though that only included about a 2 per cent increase to the States, it was a dramatic increase when you look at the price of lumber which was very high in 1972. And although it increased in price in 1973, we still had an increase in production to the States. I'd like to read an

article here that says, "Between now and the end of 1975 the forest industry as a whole should grow at an average rate of 3 to 4 per cent. For the period beyond 1975 it should grow to about 5 per cent." Again my point is, Mr. Speaker, that to keep up with this growth we must have, and I would say that possibly this growth is conservative in percentage, we might have to have more supplies and we must have a suitable research program to be able to keep pace. In closing, Mr.

Speaker, I would urge all hon. members to support this bill and that we try to move ahead at a fast pace to ensure adequate supplies of wood and timber to our building people and to the people of Alberta. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: I believe the hon. Member for Pincher Creek-Crowsnest was on his feet first followed by the hon. Member for Athabasca and then the hon. Member for Wainwright.

274 ALBERTA HANSARD March 15, 1974 MR. DRAIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the realm of forest research I think probably there has been more done in more places in the world than can well be visualized by the members sitting here. The reason, of course, is that a forest in itself is vital, possibly in some of the areas of the world far more vital than it is in this particular part. Alberta, of course, has had some forests. Over the near term, in the last 50 years of development, the amount of mature timber has been depleted to a great degree.

Unfortunately, we in Alberta are in what you would class as not a prime timber-growing area. We are too far east of the rain forests. In the south we have the factors of great variations in climate resulting in checks in your timber. The incidence of a Chinook which will start the sap running and a quick change to 30 or 40 below zero will result in the cracking and deterioration of the timber and the influx of various fungi and disease factors. The realization, in fact, is that growing timber in the Province of Alberta on a sustained-yield cycle is something that is quite difficult to achieve.

It is very common in the province to the west of us to have a crop of timber planted that can be harvested satisfactorily in one person's lifetime. This, of course, is quite difficult in what we would class as our coniferous trees. Something can be said for the growing of pine which does reach maturity at about 70 years. This process could possibly be accelerated by thinnings or possibly by fertilization of the soil in the same manner a farmer fertilizes his land with fertilizer. These are some of the things that can be looked at. I was very interested in the remarks of the hon.

Member for Whitecourt when he referred to the wet areas, in other words, the polite term for muskeg. However, in this area as well there has been a fantastic amount of work done by the Finnish government where they have vast areas very similar to the Province of Alberta. They have experimented with the process of winching ploughs through - a plough that will dig about 10 or 12 feet deep. Over a period of time this has the impact of draining out and creating an environment that will allow timber to grow.

I agree there are thousands and thousands of acres in the Province of Alberta that have what you would call muskeg timber, trees that are probably 150 years old and they are only 3 or 4 inches on the butt. This would be a very, very worthwhile achievement. This would be something that could be left as a memento, if such a program were developed in the Province of Alberta. You could not expect to reap the benefits of this in any short, near-term process.

But it is something that could be handed to posterity - virgin forests of spruce covering northern Alberta no more of the muskegs, heaving muskegs and dwarf pine or any of these particular things. However, I wonder about the hon. member. In one area he advocates increased production of timber and in the other area he says it should be farmland. We can’t have it both ways, unless you are prepared, hon. member, to stand it on its edge and plant both sides. This may be a possibility that you are thinking of.

I think one of the greatest success stories that was ever achieved in timber management was that which was done in New Zealand during the nineteen 'dirty' thirties. They introduced into an area that had comparably little timber a species of southern California pine. It happened that the conditions there were very suitable for this pine because within 45 years they had developed a forest which, in fact, was the foundation of the pulp industry in New Zealand, a forest which resulted in an average stump diameter of 30 inches and a height of 135 feet.

There is nowhere that we could ever do that in the Province of Alberta. I suggest that the possibilities for timber development in the Province of Alberta definitely rest in the area of research. Hence, therefore, I do welcome this bill. I would think the area of research should converge on developing some of the coarse-type trees, some of the deciduous trees such as cottonwood and so on, something that has a growth ring that has some significance.

We are polishing off the last of the original stands of timber in my particular constituency and lest someone stand up and cry for this fact, let them realize that the reason this is being done is because this timber has reached the point of deterioration. The increment fact no longer exists a

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19740315
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L17 S3 19740315 1000 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	5b28292e542057a0f895416b766c9453fb0126ae

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