Alberta Hansard — 2 May 2005, Afternoon sitting (13:30) (Legislature 26, Session 1)

20050502

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1143 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Monday, May 2, 2005 1:30 p.m. Date: 05/05/02 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Welcome back. Let us pray. As Canadians and as Albertans we give thanks for the precious gifts of freedom and peace which we enjoy. As Members of this Legislative Assembly we rededicate ourselves to the valued traditions of parliamentary democracy as a means of serving our province and our country. Amen. Hon. members and ladies and gentlemen, please join in the singing of our national anthem. It will be led today by Mr.

Paul Lorieau. Please participate in the language of your choice. Hon. Members: O Canada, our home and native land! True patriot love in all thy sons command. With glowing hearts we see thee rise, The True North strong and free! From far and wide, O Canada, We stand on guard for thee. God keep our land glorious and free! O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. The Speaker: Please be seated. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Ms Evans: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What a delight it is today to welcome two classes from Strathcona Christian Academy. They are accompanied by their teachers, Alan Foster and Gord Robideau, parent helpers Mr. Wade Marke, Mrs. Deeann Knott, Mrs. Bauman, Tonya Shurvell, Heather Eifler, and Gange Morgan, with apologies on that pronunciation. Would they please rise and receive the warm welcome of all of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka. Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is also my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all the members of the Assem- bly a group of 26 grade 6 students from Rimbey elementary school. They are accompanied by their t eacher, Mrs. Garland, Mrs. McNaught as a teacher aide, and some parent helpers, Mrs. Service, Mrs. Braat, Mrs. Nawrot, Mrs. Vandenhoven, and Mrs. Adam. These are great kids from Rimbey. I was talking to some of them a while ago, and some of these kids actually went to Europe last winter and played hockey there and came home with a silver medal, so congratulations to them.

I’d like to ask them to rise in the members’ gallery and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s my great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly some very special people. In particular, our staff are very special to us, but the mothers of staff are even more special to us. Today I’d like to introduce – and I’ll ask her to rise – Ms Valerie Kincade, who is the mother to David Kincade, one of the researchers with the Liberal caucus.

She is a risk management consultant at the Atlantic Health Science Corporation in Saint John, New Brunswick. She’s here today with her daughter, David’s sister I think, Mrs. Kendra Johnson. I’d ask her to please rise. Mrs. Johnson is employed as an air traffic controller with Nav Canada at the Edmonton International Airport as well as being the mom of four kids. They’ve both risen, and I would ask the Assembly to please give them a warm welcome. My second introduction today, Mr. Speaker: more special people. These are staff in my office. Today we have joining my staff Cheryl Williams.

She is going to be the summer student in my office from now until the end of August. She’s just completing her second year of a bachelor of arts degree in anthropology, so she can study how humans behave in a constituency office all summer long. Thank you very much and welcome. With her is Jane Wisener. Jane is from the Maritimes, but we got her to come out here. She ran a very successful campaign during the last provincial election and gave us my colleague the Member for Edmonton-Rutherford, and I thank you for that, Jane. She is now the constituency manager for Edmonton-Centre.

I would ask you all to welcome them, please. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Rev. Abbott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure for me to rise today and introduce a guest in the public gallery. This man has recently moved to Drayton Valley from the great city of Montreal. Currently in Drayton Valley he is one of our reporters for the weekly paper there, the Western Review, so he’s going to give me lots of good stories after today. I’d ask John Michael to stand and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Eggen: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to rise and introduce to you and through you to the Assembly Tony Clark. Tony is currently the sessional research assistant with the NDP caucus. Tony is a dedicated and hard-working member of our group. As a rough-and-tumble rugby player no one messes with him. I’d like to ask him to rise and receive the very warm welcome of the Assembly today. The Speaker: Are there others? The hon. Minister of Advanced Education. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to Members of the Legislative Assembly a young student who’s just back from completing her second year at Western. The daughter of my communications director, Michael Shields, Sarah Shields is with us today, and I’d ask her to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of the House. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Vermilion-Lloydminster. Mr. Snelgrove: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a very talented and dynamic young lady from Lloydminster.

Miss Kierstin Smyth has already packed a lifetime of accomplishment into her few short years: she’s a swimming coach; she’s a music instructor; she’s ma joring in the faculty of arts, political science and history; she’s a Rutherford scholarship winner; amongst many, many others. She’s here today with Bart West and Aleksandra Nowacka. She’s doing a summer internship with ATCO with regard to government relations. I would ask that all three rise and accept the warm welcome of the Assembly.

Alberta Hansard May 2, 20051144 head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Securities Commission Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Every day the efforts of the Alberta Securities Commission to prevent a proper investigation into its operation grow more desperate. We now have a situation in which the ASC is placing unacceptable c onditions on a proposed systems audit by the Auditor General. It is making many people wonder what there is to hide there and is increasing the calls for a public inquiry.

To the Minister of Finance: in other situations does the office of the Auditor General normally have completely unfettered access to files and people when they do their audits such as, for example, of government departments? Mrs. McClellan: Mr. Speaker. I know that the hon. Leader of the Official Opposition is referring to a series of audit letters that have gone back and forth between the Alberta Securities Commission and the office of the Auditor General. The Auditor General will audit the processes and systems at the Alberta Securities Commission, and we will await his results. 1:40 Dr.

Taft: I’ll try the question again, Mr. Speaker. In other situations does the office of the Auditor General normally have completely unfettered access to files and people when they do their audits, for example of government departments? Mrs. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, I think that question is more properly placed to the office of the Auditor General. However, I can tell the hon. Leader of the Official Opposition that in all departments that I have been minister responsible for over the period of the last 17 years, the Auditor General has had full access and complete co- operation. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr.

Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, if the minister is so determined to have the Auditor General investigate the ASC, has she asked the part-time commissioners to ask Mr. Linder to exercise his authority within the Securities Ac t and allow the Auditor General access to enforcement files? Mrs. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, as I understand from the references that I’ve received from the passing back and forth of audit letters, the Auditor General will deliver an audit letter to the Alberta Securities Commission tomorrow, and they will begin their audit. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon.

Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thirty-five employees of the Alberta Securities Commission have sent a letter to the Minister of Finance stating that they are afraid that, quote, the continued deterioration of the work environment will negatively impact the future of the organization and the health of the Alberta capital markets, end quote.

These employees say that in light of the dismissal of the director of administrative services they feel too intimidated to speak to consulta nts investigating problems at the commission, but all 35 will make their names available to the minister if she agrees to keep their names confidential. Again to the Minister of Finance: what information concerning interference with enforcement cases in the Alberta Securities Commission does the minister now have in her possession? Mrs. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure if the hon.

Leader of the Opposition is referring to the letter that, as I indicated in the House, I received last week. It does state: Dear Minister McClellan, We, the blank – then written in handwriting is 35 employees. They did say in the final paragraph of the letter that they had spoken to a few of the above – I assume that that’s the 35 – and that they were willing to bring their names forward. They felt certain that many others would, if approached, as long as they were guaranteed confidential- ity. Mr.

Speaker, I have said repeatedly – in fact, I think I’m the one that stands in this House day after day and supports their request for confidentiality and anonymity. However, Mr. Speaker, other than speaking here today, I can’t convey that to the employees because not even one signature was there for me to reply to. So I have said that if they wish to provide th eir names to me, I will hold them in confidence and then approach their concerns, those that are specific, with the commission. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What information concerning interference with enforcement cases at the Alberta Securities Commission does the minister now have in her possession? Mrs. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, I have references in that letter. Most of the information in that letter – and I think it was published on the front page of the National Post, so I don’t think it’s a secret – is around human resource or employment or workpl ace issues, but there were references to the regula tory side. In my recollection, I have a letter from one of the previous employees who worked in the enforcement division.

I have a letter, which I think has also been made public, from another previous employee in the same area. What is difficult is that they refer to things that they didn’t agree with on the regulatory side, but they are not very specific. It’s very difficult to deal with something when they do not give you a specific example or case. So that’s two.

I’ve had probably three or four letters that I’ve seen to date from the public inquiring about this as well as a letter from I think you’d call this lady an advocate from eastern Canada and two offers of help from consultants that work in this industry in eastern Canada. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Taft: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. We need to get to the bottom of this, so when will the Minister of Finance do the right thing and call a full public inquiry into the controversy at the Alberta Securities Commission? Mrs. McClellan: Mr.

Speaker, I have complete confidence in the Auditor General of the province of Alberta. Absolute confidence. The Auditor General will do his audit of the Alberta Secur ities Commission. He has agreed to bring on some extra people to give this a priority and to bring the re sults to us just as quickly as he possibly can. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Enron Activities in Alberta Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A detailed examination of the Project Stanley scheme here in Alberta written by Mr.

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1145 Seabron Adamson, Enron’s hired consultant, estimates that the cost to power consumers due to Project Stanley was $45 million in one single day. To the Premier: has the government on behalf of power consumers asked for a refund of the more than $45 million that Enron’s Project Stanley cost the Alberta Power Pool in one single day? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, not to my knowledge, but I’ll have the hon. minister respond. Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The $45 million does not take into account the legislated hedges.

I’ve said over and over again that Albertans were protected, that that money would have gone back into the Power Pool, and that anything that was above a certain capped rate that any of the generators could have had prior to the power purchase arrangements being sold – they were pro- tected. There was no way in which $45 million could have benefited at all Enron. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the Minister of Energy: has anyone from the Department of Energy or the market surveillance administrator’s office on behalf of power consumers interviewed Mr.

Seabron Adamson, the author of this report? Have you talked to the author? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, there was an extrapolation in that report of $45 million. It’s correct in that, but it failed to take into account the legislated hedges that would have seen that all of those monies that were above the capped amounts at that stage would have gone back to consumers. It was put in place to protect consumers. It was put in place while there was an introduction and transition to deregulation, getting accustomed to the new rules.

If there was any volatility of that kind in the marketplace, consumers would be protected. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the same minister: given that the Frontier Economics report was available on the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s website since April of 2003, when did the Alberta Department of Energy or the market regulators first review this document? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, we’re talking some time ago. I don’t have the specific date.

I am fully aware that this has been known and has been reviewed, and in that case, to ensure that Albertans were protected, the market surveillance administrator did look at this. They did examine it and ensure that Albertans have been protected. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood, followed by the hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat. Health Care Privatization Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. During February my NDP opposition colleagues and I travelled around the province to hear first-hand Albertans’ concerns and solutions for our health care system.

Albertans told us that they want a more comprehensive system where public funding covers not only hospitals and doctors but, eventually, needed drugs, home care, and long-term care. Albertans told us that they want ed a stronger public system rather than endless experimentation with delisting, user-pay, and privatiza- tion schemes that cost more and deliver less. My question is to the Premier.

Why won’t the Premier admit that the reason that he keeps pushing the failed privatization agenda is to enable private health care corporations to pick the pockets of taxpayers and not because it will do anything to fix health care or give Albertans the health system they want and deserve? 1:50 Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. The health care symposium is not about private, for-profit health care.

It’s about looking at what exists in other jurisdictions and finding out what works and what doesn’t work and discarding those things that don’t work and considering those things that do work. There is nothing wrong with that. As a matter of fact, I think it’s an extremely good initiative, something that has never been done before in this province. The ultimate goal, of course, is to achieve sustainability in the health care system so that it’s there for you and me when we need it. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, if the objective is to eliminate those things that don’t work, will the Premier then cancel the provision of joint replacement and cataract surgery in private clinics in Calgary, which cost more and have longer waiting lists? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, I don’t know that to be true. I do know that it has taken tremendous pressure off the public system. It simply makes sense. It simply makes sense that if you can go someplace else, you don’t go to the public system. It involves simple mathematics. You know, the more people who don’t go to the public system, the less pressure there will be on the public system.

It makes sense. It’s mathematically correct. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, math has never been the Premier’s strong suit. If in fact it costs more and provides longer waiting lists and if there is no public option in Calgary, why is it preferred to do it through private delivery, Mr. Premier? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, it’s poppycock what he talks about. You know, if he can’t understand me and very, very simple arithmetic, maybe he can understand the hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Evans: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At the time that the Calgary health authority signed a contract with HRC for hip and joint replacement, it added an extra capacity to treat 500 people who had considerable pain and suffering while they waited on long lists. It’s true that we still have a lot of people on this, 4,800 at last count last week, but we are making a difference. The new process with the arthroplasty and the work that we’re doing in the three clinics across Alberta: we’ll continue that. We are enhancing the service; we’re not detracting from the service. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat, followed by the hon.

Member for Edmonton-Centre. Natural Gas Rebates Mr. Mitzel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For the past few years this

Alberta Hansard May 2, 20051146 government has recognized the extra expense to Albertans coming from the increased cost of natural gas. Though we understand that we live in a world where energy prices are dictated by commodity markets, it’s nevertheless made Albertans rather fearful to open their gas bills every month, especially in the wintertime. Albertans are also grateful for the natural gas rebate, which has been in effect for these past few years, but it’s due to end early in 2006. Greenhouse operators are especially concerned in order to plan for their future.

My question today is to the Minister of Energy. Does the minister intend to renew this rebate? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The natural gas rebate program was put in over a three-year period, and he’s correct in mentioning that it’s scheduled to end in the spring of 2006. As part of that, there was a commitment that we would undertake a review of that. Our department has already begun some initial review of that program, and that will likely be completed later this year. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mitzel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again to the same minister: would the minister agree to extending the rebate indefinitely and making it for a full 12 months rather than for just five months? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, while I would like to emphasize that Albertans have benefited tremendously by this – over half a billion dollars have been given to Albertans in a time of high prices of natural gas, when we received the royalties, to see that Albertans benefited from their Alberta energy advantage – I would say that it’s a little premature at this stage to say whether that program would be indefinitely continued.

That’s part of the review process that we’re undertaking. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mitzel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the same minister: if the outcome of the review were to suggest not extending or renewing this rebate, will he then consider a rebate for those rural users such as greenhouses, exotic oil processors, and irrigators, some of whose bills are in excess of $30,000 per month and some of whom may not qualify for any rebate? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to highlight in light of those commercial greenhouse operators, forage dehydrators, grain dryers, agriculture irrigators that the program was actually modified to see that they could accommodate their months of highest usage. They could choose any five months in the year where they had the highest usage and apply for the rebate on those months. They can yet have through to June of this year to apply for that if they have missed it for the 2004-05 year, and we would encourage them to do so. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Fort.

Midwifery Services Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thursday, May 5, marks the International Day of the Midwife, but midwives in Alberta are finding it increasingly difficult to operate because of a lack of recognition and funding. In 1997 money was put toward developing the integration of midwifery services evaluation project, and since then the entire midwifery community has been anxiously awaiting a decision. My questions today are all to the Minister of Health and Wellness. When will the integration of midwifery services evalua- tion project report, now eight years old, be released publicly?

Ms Evans: Well, Mr. Speaker, although I cannot tell the hon. member opposite when the report will be released publicly, I can assure you that there is still work being done relative to the Health Professions Act relative to the integration of service delivery by other health professionals and disciplines. We have been paying attention to what the midwives have been saying, that they can work with us, and with the inception of primary care I look forward to the day when even more service involvement can happen because of the involvement of midwives. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Thank you.

To the same minister: will the minister restore the position of consumer representative back to the Mid- wifery Health Disciplines Committee? Ms Evans: Mr. Speaker, I have been looking at a number of the committees that have been providing advice and support in the health care delivery system. I have not yet made a decision relative to that, but I would welcome the hon. member to provide me a briefing on how she believes that that would be an important addition to the committee. Ms Blakeman: Happy to, Madam Minister.

The third question to the same minister: given that midwife- attended home births cost the system $2,800 compared to a $4,100 price tag for a hospital delivery, when will the government instigate reforms for a sustainable health care system and include midwifery services under health care coverage? Ms Evans: Well, Mr. Speaker, certainly it’s an important distinction the hon. member has made, but quality health care isn’t all about examining the bottom line. Quality health care is about engaging in those practices that deliver the health care, as it should be, to people who are in need of it.

The hon. member has pointed out the cost- effectiveness of midwives. We’ve had some conversation between the other partners – the physicians, family practitioners, and others – and I know that midwives anxiously await the results of that. When we’re ready, we will provide further information to the House. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort, followed by the hon. Member for St. Albert. Health Symposium Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Health care is a great concern for my constituents as well as for Albertans and Canadians at large. My constituents worry about access to and quality of health care.

They also worry about the increase in public spending on health care and the cost to themselves. Given that tomorrow there is a symposium in Calgary with international experts, my first question is to the hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Can the minister explain why the government is hosting this symposium? The Speaker: The hon. minister.

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1147 Ms Evans: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think the most important reason is that in Canada we rank third out of the OECD countries on the amount of money we’re spending. Alberta has consistently been one of the biggest spenders in health care. However, in terms of performance, Mr. Speaker, while we have an amazing health care system, a wonderful, publicly funded health care system, we only rank about middle of the pack in performance.

We believe that the opportunity to listen to 27 speakers from nine countries will enhance not only the regional health authorities’ understanding of some of the best practices elsewhere, but we’ll all learn from that exchange of ideas and information. The Speaker: The hon. member. 2:00 Mr. Cao: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that the subject of health care is heavily politicized and my constituents have been confused by political campaigns, my straight-to-the-point question is to the same minister. Will the symposium lead to increased privatization in Alberta? Ms Evans: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I know that our critics would like to say that we’re challenging the Canada Health Act. We believe that it’s about improving quality. It’s about improving access. It’s about improving patient care. It’s not about challenging the Canada Health Act. It’s about doing the right thing for Albertans so that they continue to support a system that they know is better than in most places anywhere in the world. The Speaker: The hon. member? The hon. Member for St. Albert, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Centralized Teacher Bargaining Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This government tends to centralize power, which has consistently hurt the ability of local authorities to carry out their mandates. Local school boards are charged with bargaining but have been stripped of their ability to raise money, and the province hasn’t always funded the local settlements. Some school boards are now supporting a move to centralized bargaining despite considerable evidence that such schemes don’t work. My question is to the Minister of Education.

Is the minister prepared to implement this centralized bargaining model despite the fact that it is opposed by teachers and close to half of the school boards across this province? Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I suspect that the hon. member is referencing recommendation 81(

a) as it appears in the Alberta Commission on Learning report, which called for a province-wide or provincial bargaining association to be established. Now, that particular motion went forward. It was supported by the Alberta School Boards Association membership, and I expect to r eceive a copy of it any day so that I can review it. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What specific evidence does the minister have that centralized bargaining will produce more productive labour relations or superior educational outcomes for communities than local bargaining?

What evidence does he have? Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I think that the Alberta Commission on Learning did an incredible job with an enormous amount of in- depth study and review of best practices and various types of bargaining models before they made that recommendation. I’m sure that if the member wishes, we might be able to find some of that information for him. The fact is that they brought forward the recommendation because they perceived there to be an imbalance between the way the ATA, the Alberta Teachers’ Association, was able to negotiate versus the way individual boards were able to negotiate.

The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Flaherty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Is the minister considering moving educational decision-making even further away from the local level by eliminating elected school boards and appointing regional boards across this province? Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I think the key word is, obviously, “local,” and this was a decision made by those locals on the weekend. As soon as I have a chance to review it with the Alberta School Boards Association and perhaps other education stake- holders, that will be a time, then, to give an appropriate answer to those kinds of questions.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Maybe we can learn more about this issue. Alberta’s Commission on Learning made 95 recommendations to the provincial government. A lot of progress has been made on the 86 accepted recommendations, but some are still under review. Recommendation 81, for example, called for a legislated employer bargaining model, but some people are con- cerned that a provincial employer bargaining association might weaken local relationships between school boards and local ATA members.

My question to the Minister of Education: can the minister explain the true purpose of recommendation 81 and why it has been delayed? Mr. Zwozdesky: Well, Mr. Speaker, recommendation 81(

a) sought to correct what the Alberta Commission on Learning saw as an imbalance between a very powerful and highly structured Alberta Teachers’ Association in comparison with a loosely knit gr oup of local school boards. Those were words that the Alberta Commission on Learning used or words to that effect. It’s proven to be a very sensitive issue. At the time that it was brought forward to the government, the government said that this would require further review and study, so it went to the Alberta School Boards Associa- tion. They did a review. They did a study. They did a preliminary vote in November of 2004.

That vote said: go ahead and find a model and bring it back. That model took time to develop, and that really is part of what the delay has been about. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. How will the outcome of this weekend’s vote by the Alberta School Boards Association affect local bargaining? Mr. Zwozdesky: Well, Mr. Speaker, if government were to accept what the local school boards accepted this past weekend, it would really mean that local bargaining would become centralized bargaining, and you would have a parity of models.

What the ATA currently has, the Alberta School Boards Association would then have, so essentially that’s what would happen.

Alberta Hansard May 2, 20051148 The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final question: can the minister tell us what the next steps are to address the results of the ASBA vote? Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, I believe I have a meeting already set with the chairperson of the Alberta School Boards Association.

The purpose of that meeting is for me to first of all receive a copy of this new model, which responds to recommendation 81(a), and at the same time have an opportunity to chat about it and review it in more detail, discuss it, and at the same time, too, to meet with other stakeholders. I understand that the Alberta T eachers’ Association have also contacted my office, and they want a meeting, so I’ll meet with them as well. I think, Mr. Speaker, it’s important to also note that there was a second vote that was taken, and that one has to be looked at in tandem with 81(a).

It’s generally referred to as 81(c), and in a nutshell that particular vote was with respect to what can and cannot be bargained for should a centralized unit in fact come into pl ace. So things like pupil-teacher ratios, classroom size, minutes of instruction would all be put on the table. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Gang Violence Mrs. Mather: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Early Sunday morning the community of Mill Woods once again was jolted by the sounds of gunfire.

This incident caused yet another fatality, the third in the past two weeks. Even when such events are targeted and not random, residents of my constituency are extremely concerned that the next bullet may hit them or their children. My question is to the Solicitor General. What is the Solicitor General doing to facilitate antigang activity by the various municipal police services? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It was indeed a tragic incident that occurred this weekend, where the life of a 19 year old was taken.

Again, the Edmonton Police Service homicide unit and the gang unit are investigating. There are highly skilled and trained officers that are investigating this incident. Again, Mr. Speaker, the larger question is the drugs that are involved in 98 per cent of these cases. It’s just shown that it took the life of a 19-year-old boy. Our condolences are, obviously, with the family of this young man. Mr. Speaker, gangs are a breeding ground for organized crime.

This government has supported the Criminal Intelligence Service Alberta as well as the integrated response to organized crime by providing funding for them each year. As well, these officers that belong to these units work with the Edmonton Police Service, the RCMP, and the Calgary Police Service. They do have the skills to investigate this, and they, obviously, are at this present time. Mrs.

Mather: To the same minister: given that more constables on the street are the most effective way to fight crime, will the minister commit to providing additional funding to major urban police services to hire more new officers? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Cenaiko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Solicitor General did provide the Edmonton Police Service with $10 million in municipal policing grant funding this year, that they can use towards whatever they feel is necessary for their police service budget.

We’ve increased the amount of funding by $6 million, from $37 million to $43 million, for municipal police grants this year. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. Mather: Thank you. Again to the same minister: can the Solicitor General tell us what types of preventative strategies are being developed to help keep our kids from being drawn into the gang lifestyle? Mr. Cenaiko: Mr. Speaker, there are a number of programs throughout the province. They do vary by school board in conjunc- tion with the school resource officer; that is, a police officer that works in the community.

A number of those programs are done by the local police service, whether it’s a municipal service or the RCMP. In fact, some special constables that are hired by the municipalities are as well providing instructional and prevention programs to school classes from grade 7 to grade 12. Some of those programs include DARE. Some include some other projects. 2:10 As well, Mr.

Speaker, the school resource officers that are in our high schools and in our junior highs are a tremendous resource for school boards and for those schools to utilize to speak to the kids, to let them know that drugs and their involvement in drugs are, obviously, a criminal activity. They do see the bigger picture in the fact that a number of young lives have been taken throughout Alberta in the last few months. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Foothills. Securities Commission (continued) Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Finance minister is not exactly showing stellar leadership when it comes to the Alberta Securities Commission. One day the minister vows to protect whistle-blowers, only to be sandbagged by the ASC commissioners, who fire the director of administrative services while he’s on medical leave. Then the ASC hires a forensic auditor to try to catch other whistle-blowers. Finally, the ASC refuses to co-operate with the Auditor General’s investigation called by this minister. My question to the Minister of Finan ce is simply this.

When will the minister have had enough of the senior brass at the Securities Commission thumbing its collective nose at her and the province’s Auditor General, and when will she take decisive action to put a stop to it? Mrs. McClellan: Well, Mr. Speaker, as I’ve indicated in an earlier answer, the Auditor General and the Alberta Securities Commission have been exchanging letters of audit and responses to letters of audit. This is not uncommon. What is uncommon is that we trade them and exchange them in the press. Because of the interest in this, a lot of that is happening right now.

Any government department that has been audited by the Auditor General’s office would probably exchange a letter of audit, or we’d get a letter of audit and respond to it. Mr. Speaker, I made it very clear in my earlier answer that the Auditor General, subsequent to their discussion last week, is submitting a letter to the Alberta Securities Commission tomorrow,

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1149 Tuesday, on the audit. The Auditor General will conduct his audit of the Alberta Securities Commission. Under the act that is in this Legislature, the Auditor General has the power and the authority to conduct that audit, and he will do it. Mr. Martin: Well, Mr. Speaker, on the question of letters of audit and audit letters going, it seems to us, the public, that the Auditor General should have every right to go in and do the audit, as the minister wants. What is the holdup? Mrs. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, it’s not a holdup. I mean, this is I think moving along quite quickly.

They had discussions last week, exchanged letters, and on Tuesday – that’s the Auditor General’s time frame, not mine. I think that in view of all of the activities that the Auditor General has, he’s moving this along quite expeditiously. Mr. Speaker, the Alberta Securities Commission operates under statute, and if any of the members wish to read those statutes, they would understand their obligations. I think the Alberta Securities Commission understands their obligations. I don’t think that the minister has to direct them or call them or let them know how to interpret their legislation.

Certainly, I have every confidence that the Auditor General understands his power and authority, and he will carry that out. Mr. Martin: Mr. Speaker, to the minister: does it not seem passing strange to this minister that the Auditor General, who, we said, is a top officer of this Legislature, has to go hat in hand to the Securities Commission before they’ll offer him the right to do what he’s supposed to do? Mrs. McClellan: Well, Mr.

Speaker, that speaks to maybe the naïveté of the member, or maybe he just doesn’t understand that in any audit process it is an accepted procedure that you have an audit letter, or a letter of audit. It outlines the parameters of your audit and prepares whoever you’re auditing for to have the material available to you. That is done in every audit that I’ve been involved with, in any department that I’ve had responsibilities for. That is a common practice. What is not common is that we share them with the press. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Foothills, followed by the hon. Member for Lethbridge-East.

SuperNet Mr. Webber: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first question is to the Minister of Restructuring and Government Efficiency. [interjec- tions] Yes, this man right here. In February the minister announced a completion plan for the Alberta SuperNet. We were told that rural communities would be able to connect to Internet service providers by April 30. That date has come and gone. Have we hit the mark, or is the SuperNet

schedule still falling behind? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Ouellette: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We reached a very significant milestone on Friday afternoon. Our completion plan definitely hit the mark. I’m pleased to report that 421 of 429 communities are now ready to connect Internet service providers via the Alberta SuperNet. We have eight more rural communities to go, and we’re working closely with each community to jointly address SuperNet construction needs as quickly as we possibly can.

I’m proud of the work that we’ve done with Bell and Axia and with the efforts over the last two months that they did to make this happen. The rewards are clear. We’re able to bring high-speed to all rural communities. What a huge milestone to meet and in our centennial year. It’s great to live in Alberta, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Webber: Again to the same minister: I’m wondering why there are eight remaining communities still not hooked up. When can we expect to be able to take advantage of the SuperNet? Mr. Ouellette: Mr.

Speaker, as I mentioned, at this point we only have eight more points of presence to go, and we did not

schedule these sites for April completion because we knew that there were challenges in a few different areas of the province. Throughout the SuperNet’s project it’s been a joint effort with each individual community, and there are local construction needs to consider. The remaining sites will be completed between now and September 30. That’s the date we announced that the whole network would be complete. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Webber: Thank you. Again to the same minister: can he tell us what the next step is toward full SuperNet completion? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr.

Ouellette: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Sometimes breaking large projects into smaller phases means that we can make a better tracking process, and we can track it better. We did that in February when we announced that we would be completing in three different phases. We hit our first target, and now nearly 400 – 400 – rural SuperNet communities are ready to connect to service providers. The next milestone is June 30, when the majority of our facilities will be connected. In February when we made this announcement, we had less than 500 connected, and today we have over a thousand connected.

That’s significant progress. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East, followed by the hon. Member for Foothills-Rocky View. Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. AISH clients have recently received news that the long-overdue increase to AISH payments will be implemented by this government. The 5 per cent of AISH clients who live in assisted care facilities have not been so fortunate.

Albertans with disabilities so severe that they require daily living assistance in a care facility are provided with room and board, which is paid to the institution, and a measly personal living allowance of $175 a month. My question is to the Minister of Seniors and Community Supports. Why are the AISH benefits increases not being implemented for all AISH recipients, including those in the assisted care facilities? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Fritz: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the hon. member indicated, we do have a specialized program within AISH, which is known as the modified AISH program.

It is for about 2 per cent of Albertans, which is approximately 800 Albertans of low income that have a severe disability. Those people reside usually in a long-term care setting that can provide the type of assistance that they do need,

Alberta Hansard May 2, 20051150 but some are moving to designated assisted living, which is a bit of a lower level of medical care. The amount of funding that is available for people with modified AISH is based on a per diem set through Health and Wellness of $42 per day, which is a little over $1,200, and that includes, then, accommodation, meals, la undry, health care needs, prescription drug costs, et cetera. Quite a wide range. Also, they do receive, as the member indicated, $ 175 per month for their personal care needs. 2:20 The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Pastoor: Thank you.

To the same minister: does this govern- ment consider the needs of assisted living care clients to be less than those who are able to live independently? Mrs. Fritz: Well, Mr. Speaker, not at all. In fact, I’m surprised the hon. member asked that question. As I said, this is a very special- ized program for people with a severe disability that reside in long- term care centres, and in fact the amount of funding that they receive is above the basic AISH program.

With the basic AISH program, as you know, we’ve recently increased the benefit to $950 immediately and a thousand dollars by the end of the year, but the AISH client that the member is speaking of is a client who receives a benefit of almost $1,400 a month for all of that listing that I had described regarding health care needs and whatnot and who also receives a benefit of $175 per month. Ms Pastoor: Again to the same minister: will this government review the level of funding it provides to disabled Albertans living in care facilities? Mrs. Fritz: Well, yes, I’m pleased to answer that as well, Mr. Speaker.

That’s in keeping with recommendation 11 in the AISH review report. The chair of the AISH review, the Member for Strathcona, who is also the chair of the Premier’s Council on the Status of Persons with Disabilities, has been meeting with staff in the department. Part of that will be the modified AISH benefit. I think you’re asking the question about the $175 benefit, and that is being reviewed. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Foothills-Rocky View, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Regulatory Reform Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business has recently praised British Columbia’s efforts at cutting red tape and reducing regulations. My question is to the Minister of Restructuring and Government Efficiency. While Alberta is known as one of the most effective and efficient govern- ments in Canada, might there be a need to follow in the footsteps of British Columbia? Mr. Ouellette: Mr. Speaker, I certainly don’t mind giving credit where credit is due. The B.C. government is well on their way to regulatory reform, and I believe that they could have a good model for success.

I don’t think we have to reinvent the wheel here. I think we can look at other places where there’s su ccess. In fact, I plan on and I’ve been trying to get some meetings with them, and I think I’ll be meeting with some of the people from B.C. that brought this in as soon as their election is over and when our House comes out of sitting. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: with Alberta’s new regulatory review initiative will this focus on the number of regulations we have in place or the cost of enforcing those regulations? Mr.

Ouellette: We’re in the midst of defining our regulatory secretariat’s mandate and where the focus should be, Mr. Speaker, but I would expect that it will encompass both the number of regulations and the cost of those remaining regulations. Interestingly enough, I was in Washington, DC, last week where I discovered, among many other things, that the Gettysburg address has 266 words. There are 1,322 words in the Declaration of Independence. Even the Lord’s Prayer has 66 words. Yet I’m told that one state’s regulation on the sale of cabbage totalled 26,000 words.

Of course, the need for regulatory reform is not confined to south of the border, Mr. Speaker. We will forge ahead with regulatory review and cutting red tape and streamlining services to benefit all Albertans. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: will this new initiative on regulatory review be a one-time-only initiative, or do you envision it to be an ongoing effort? Mr. Ouellette: Without question, Mr.

Speaker, regulatory review is here to stay, at least as long as this government is in place, which will no doubt be during my lifetime and my children’s lifetime. Regulatory review would become a permanent feature of this government’s ongoing efforts to strengthen the Alberta advantage. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie, followed by the hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Support for Active Living Mr. Agnihotri: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Sports play an important

part in building a healthy community and enhancing our quality of life. It fosters the kind of spirit that contributes to a vibrant commu- nity. This government has pledged to take steps to make Albertans the healthiest people in the world. My questions are to the Minister of Community Development. Given that the recent budget did not provide any additional funding for sports and recreation, does this mean that active living is not a priority for this government? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, quite to the contrary.

If one looks at the budget for the Department of Community Development, significant amounts of money have been spent through centennial legacy projects for restoring aging infrastructure for recreational facilities. We look also at what we’ve done with parks as an example, a quadrupling of the budget for parks, clearly an important part of our recreational infrastructure, $17 million reinvested in the Canmore Nordic Centre, a remarkable piece of infrastructure required for sport and recreation. I think that the hon. member needs to expand his understanding and definition of what recreation is, of what sport is.

It’s not simply what’s funded through the Alberta Sport, Recreation, Parks & Wildlife Foundation, but there is an enormous infrastructure worth hundreds of millions of dollars in this province that allows kids to play hockey, allows children to play on sports fields, to be out in the

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1151 winter at recreation venues throughout the province. So, Mr. Speaker, we have a very strong commitment to this. Mr. Agnihotri: To the same minister: given that the Alberta sport plan was submitted to the government in 2003 but has still not been implemented, will the minister tell us if he’s pla nning to consider implementing any of the 180 strategies put forward? Mr. Mar: The simple answer is yes, Mr. Speaker. The Alberta sport plan is a document of some extensive recommendations.

At this point we’ve looked at a number of different options in terms of getting the sport plan out there and how it might be funded. We’ve taken some steps that have gone beyond the sport plan. As an example, we recently met with the province of British Columbia and cosigned an agreement with that government with respect to joint use of Olympic infrastructure facilities so that Canadian athletes will have access to some of the best facilities both in British Columbia and Alberta in their efforts to become medal winners at the 2010 Winter Olympics in British Columbia.

So there are steps that we’re taking with respect to the sport plan. It is not a complete set of responses at this point, and there are some elements where we’ve gone beyond that which has been set out in that plan, sir. Mr. Agnihotri: To the same minister: will this government commit to implementing long-term policies to support our grassroots and high-performance athletes? Mr. Mar: We already have, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker: Hon. members, in a few seconds from now I’ll call upon the first of a number of members today, but first of all the historic comment of the day. 2:30 Vignettes from Alberta’s History The Speaker: On May 2, 1923, Florence Lassandro, née Filumena Costanzo, was hung for the murder of Constable Steven Lawson at the Fort Saskatchewan jail. She was the first and only woman to be hanged in Alberta. In 2003 the Calgary Opera and the Banff Centre commissioned and produced an operatic version of her involvement in a sordid tale of booze smuggling and crime in the Crowsnest Pass.

The opera Filumena opened Canada’s National Arts Centre’s two-week festival of Alberta culture, Alberta Scene, in Ottawa last Thursday. Might we revert briefly to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head: Introduction of Guests (reversion) The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Infrastructure and Transporta- tion. Dr. Oberg: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s an honour and privilege to introduce to you and through to you to the Members of the Legislative Assembly 22 visitors from Holy Cross collegiate in Strathmore. There are 16 grades 7 and 8 students as well as Mrs.

Holly Rawlek, Michele Barrett, Shirley Boiteau, Mr. Glydon, Mrs. Bauhuis, and Mrs. Murray. I would ask them all to rise and receive the very warm welcome of the Legislative Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne. Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m so happy today to introduce to you and through you the second half of 150 students, teachers, and parent helpers from the Percy Baxter sc hool in Whitecourt. They are currently studying local government and are visiting the Legislature today to learn more about what goes on in this building.

They are seated in the public gallery, and I would ask them all to stand and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Egmont. Alberta’s Research Environment Mr. Herard: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The govern- ment’s 20-year strategic plan talks about how it will achieve the goals of unleashing innovation and becoming a leader in learning.

Two recent announcements move us closer to this commitment to building a world-class research environment in Alberta and highlight the province’s ability to attract and retain the high-quality profes- sionals needed to move the innovation agenda forward. Last week the province announced that Dr. Stuart Kauffman, a medical scientist known around the world for his groundbreaking protocols, has chosen Alberta as the place to work on his research, which involves new ways to treat cancer. Dr.

Kauffman is the latest in a line of world-renowned researchers brought to the province by the Alberta Informatics Circle of Research Excellence, otherwise known as iCORE, which was established in Alberta in 1999. iCORE was created to strengthen the province’s university-based research system and attract top talent to the province. Alberta is now home to some of the world’s best researchers working in emerging areas like wireless communications, artificial intelligence, and nanocomputing. Mr. Speaker, another important incentive for keeping and retaining graduate students is scholarships.

Last week the Minister of Advanced Education announced that more than half a million dollars in scholarships are being awarded to 35 graduate students studying in a variety of fields, including clinical psychology, electrical engineering, neuroscience, and molecular and cellular biology. Mr. Speaker, all Albertans should be proud of the investments the government is making in the fu ture and the world-class research environment being created in this province.

Alberta continues to be one of the best places to live, work, and raise a family, and by supporting this talent and fostering an environment for education and innovation, this province definitely has a bright future ahead. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cypress-Medicine Hat. Emergency Preparedness Mr. Mitzel: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to talk about the importance of emergency preparedness.

Earlier today I accompa- nied the Minister of Municipal Affairs as we demonstrated the emergency public warning system to municipalities and broadcasters in the constituencies of Medicine Hat and Cypress-Medicine Hat. This event showcased the province-wide system and how it uses radio, television, and cable broadcasts to warn Albertans of life- threatening disasters and emergencies. With this implementation in southeast Alberta it is my understanding that the entire province is now covered.

As this week is Emergency Preparedness Week, it is important to all Albertans to know the role they play in keeping themselves and

Alberta Hansard May 2, 20051152 their families safe. Floods, fires, tornadoes, and severe weather are some of the scenarios that can occur to any Albertan at any time. Being prepared means understanding the risks to your area, devising a family emergency plan, and making sure you have necessary resources on hand. Work with your family to prepare an emergency plan. Make sure your family understands the plan, and practise it at least once a year. Further, be sure your child’s school has your current contact information. You should also be familiar, Mr.

Speaker, with the emergency plan for your workplace and keep a list of emergency numbers close by. Having emergency kits on hand is another essential element of being prepared. Kits for your home should include basic equipment like waterproof matches, a small flashlight and batteries, and a can opener. You’ll also need to have food and water available and should also include candles, a crank or battery-operated radio, prescription medications, and copies of your important documents. These are just some of the steps Albertans can take in preparing for an emergency.

Alberta is seen as a leader in emergency management by helping Albertans, its municipalities, and other stakeholders prepare for, respond to, and recover from emergencies in Alberta. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose. Wetaskiwin and Camrose Leaders of Tomorrow Awards Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to rise today to recognize the efforts of young volunteers in my constitu- ency and the achievements of eight of my constituents. Each year both Wetaskiwin and Camrose hold separate Leaders of Tomorrow award ceremonies.

These awards recognize young people who have made exceptional contributions to their communi- ties by volunteering. Between the two ceremonies there were 68 young people nominated for their commitment to volunteering. While only eight received an award, the appreciation of the hard work of all those nominated was shown at both of these ceremonies. On April 18 four outstanding Albertans from Wetaskiwin and the surrounding area were recognized for their efforts. They are Destiny Schmidt, Katherine Fraser, Sonja Fedorak, and Christopher Kirwan.

On April 21 the achievements of four exceptional young people from Camrose and the surrounding area were acknowledged by their community. They are Kalynn Dobos, Kari Arnston, Jordan Lee, and Erika Mundel. Those honoured during these ceremonies ranged from six to 25 years of age. The causes to which they donated their time include church organizations, mentoring other young people, helping out at school and with sporting activities. While the organizations which benefit from these volunteering efforts are as different as the young people who donate their time, one characteristic binds these people together.

This is a desire to make their community a better place to live. These individuals have been recognized by their communities as leaders of tomorrow, and their actions leave no doubt that they are also leaders of today. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lac La Biche-St. Paul. Nursing Week Mr. Danyluk: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to rise today in recognition of Nursing Week, which will be celebrated across Canada and around the world from May 9 to May 15.

The theme for the week will be Patients First: Safety Always, which is very reflective of how committed our nurses are to ensuring that Albertans receive the best-quality treatment available. Nurses are often the front lines of health care systems and play an incredibly large role in providin g top-quality health care for all Albertans. A nurse’s job and dedication doesn’t end with their shift either. Countless charity and volunteer organizations depend heavily on the time and expertise donated by the incredible people who take up nursing as a profession.

Nurses don’t just work in large hospitals in our major cities. In rural Alberta especially our nurses help administer care to nursing homes, home-care programs, clinics, and a variety of other services, including a very useful Health Link call centre. They are critical in ensuring and maintaining a high quality of life for rural Albertans, and we need to continue to encourage nurses to relocate in rural Alberta. We need to remember not to take for granted all the hard work nurses do to improve Albertans’ lives and our quality of life.

I ask all Albertans to go out of their way during Nursing Week to thank one of our wonderful nurses for the job that they do every day. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. 2:40 Events Attended by Member for Calgary-Varsity Mr. Chase: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In the evening of Saturday, April 16, members of the Canoffer group, which began with 10 families who had originally immigrated to Fort McMurray from the southern state of Kerala in India in 1980, held their 25th annual fundraising banquet.

Over the quarter century the group’s membership has grown by hundreds, and their aid donations to a variety of countries and causes have grown by the thousands. Local CBC radio host and Calgary volunteer extraordinaire Jeff Collins was the emcee for this great event that I had the honour of attending in my Calgary-Varsity constituency.

During the afternoon of Sunday, April 17, my wife and I had the pleasure of attending the Chrysalis 10th annual achievement awards, which recognized the tremendous volunteering accomplishments of developmentally challenged individuals, their families, and a whole host of volunteers and corporate sponsors who recognize the value of these individuals’ contributions and provide numerous workplace opportunities for them to demonstrate their talents.

The Chrysalis sponsors and business partners include Casablanca Video, Chrysalis Awards Committee, Chrysalis Charitable Foundation, Chrysalis staff and volunteers, Community Natural Foods, Country 105 FM, Leland Industries Inc., Marjorie and Francis Lefaivre, the Red Cross Society, and the Delta Bow Valley Hotel. I’ve never seen so much pride and so many hugs at a single event. My hope and that of the Chrysalis Society is that the Alberta government will step up to the plate by recognizing and providing funding for this highly supportive program.

This past weekend at the University of Calgary the public, including all members of this Legislature, were invited to attend a health care conference co-sponsored by the nonpartisan Friends of Medicare and the Parkland Institute entitled Weighing the Evidence. The hon. members for Edmonton-Centre, Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood, Edmonton-Calder, Calgary-Mountain View, and myself along with over 300 concerned Albertans heard international, national, and provincial experts praise the Canadian system of inclusive, publicly delivered, administered, accountable, and affordable medicare. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1153 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner. Definition of Marriage Mr. Hinman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday I had the privilege of attending a pro traditional marriage rally in Mill Woods, right here in Edmonton. At the rally Bishop Fred Henry of Calgary expressed his concerns over the complaint filed against him with the Alberta Human Rights Commission. He questioned how a pastoral letter written by him and published in a Calgary newspaper could cause a complaint to be filed against him.

This really is an attack on his rights to freedom of religion, speech, and association. The Supreme Court’s reference decision regarding the definition of marriage did not give an answer to the fourth question posed by the federal Liberal government, which asked if opposite-sex requirements for marriage are consistent with the Charter. The Supreme Court has stated that to answer this question has the potential to undermine the government’s stated goal of equal civil marriage. There is no compelling basis for jeopardizing acquired rights, which they say would be the potential outcome of answering question 4.

The court also pointed out that it was only the Attorney General of Canada who has publicly adopted the position that the opposite- sex requirement for marriage was unconstitutional, not Parliament or the Supreme Court.

This is contrary to their decision in Egan versus Canada, where it was stated that same-sex marriage, “neither in its purpose nor in its effect . . . constitute an infringement of the fundamental values sought to be protected by the Charter.” The court did not say that the government should change the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples, only that it was within its jurisdiction to do so. It is evident that the Supreme Court has given provinces the opportunity to defend traditional marriage. Alberta is in the position to do it.

This government can respond to the majority of Albertans and its own caucus and entrench and protect traditional marriage in Alberta for the benefit of all Canadians. All we have to do is nothing to lose this battle. We can protect traditional marriage, but we must act now. Calendar of Special Events The Speaker: Hon. members, as this is the first day that we’re sitting in the month of May, at this time I’ll advise hon. members of the various dates and weeks that are being commemorated in the month of May.

We already know that the year 2005 is the International Year of Microcredit and the International Year for Sport and Physical Education, but more importantly, it’s also the Year of the Veteran.

May is Cystic Fibrosis Month, Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month, Medic-Alert Month, Huntington’s Disease Awareness Month, Speech and Hearing Awareness Month, Hepatitis Awareness Month, National Fitness Month, Hearing Awareness Month, Museum Month, Motorcycle and Bicycle Safety Awareness Month, Asian Pacific Heritage Month, Red Shield Appeal Month, Child Find’s Green Ribbon of Hope campaign month, and the Light the Way Home campaign. April 1 to May 30 is also Girl Guides sandwich cookie weeks, or month. April 23 to May 23 is National Physiotherapy Month. April 25 to May 1 is Library Week. May 1 was May Day.

May 1 was also the Annual Hike for Hospice Palliative Care. May 1 to May 7 is National Summer Safety Week, as it is Spinal Health Week, as it is Emergency Preparedness Week, as it is National Forest Week, as it is International Compost- ing Awareness Week, as it is International Youth Week, as it also is North American Occupational Safety and Health Week, as it also is Drinking Water Week and Allergy Awareness Week. May 2 to May 8 is Respect for Law Week, as May 2 to May 8 is also National Hospice Palliative Care Week, as it also is National Mental Health Week. May 3 is World Press Freedom Day.

May 3 is also World Asthma Day. May 4 to May 5 is Provincial Leave a Legacy Week. May 5, later in this week, is Holocaust Memorial Day, Yom ha-Shoah. Also, 60 years ago was the armistice, the signing of peace, between the German invaders and Holland and the liberation of Holland. It’s also the day on which the bully and coward Adolf Hitler killed himself. May 5 is also the International Day of the Midwife. May 5 to May 7 is the multiple sclerosis carnation campaign. May 6 is International No Diet Day. May 6 to May 15 is Information Technology Week.

May 8 is World Red Cross Day, as May 8 is also Optimist Day of Non-Violence. May 8 to 15 is Alberta Crime Prevention Week. May 8 is also Mother’s Day. May 9 to May 15 is National Nursing Week, as it also is National Mining Week. May 10 is National Denim Day. May 10 is International Day for Physical Activity. May 12 is International Nursing Day, as it also is Canada Health Day, as it also is Fibromyalgia Awareness Day. May 14 is Raise the Flag Day. May 15 is International Day of Families. May 15 to May 21 is National Police Week, as it also is Emer- gency Medical Services Awareness Week.

May 16 to May 19 is the Children’s Forum. May 16 to May 22 is Intergenerational Week. May 17 is World Telecommunication Day. May 18 is International Museums Day. May 20 to May 26 is National Road Safety Week. May 21 is the World Day for Cultural Diversity for Dialogue and Development. May 22 to May 28 is Safe Boating Week. May 22 is International Day for Biological Diversity. May 23 is Victoria Day. May 24 to May 27 is Aboriginal Awareness Week. May 25 is National Missing Children’s Day. May 25 to June 1 is the Week of Solidarity with the Peoples of Non-Self-Governing Territories.

May 29 is International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers, as it also is Schiz ophrenia Walk the World day, as it also is World Partnership Walk day. May 30 to June 5 is National Sun Awareness Week, and May 31 is World No-Tobacco Day. So that’s important in the ev ent that members want to give recognitions this month. We don’t want to miss anybody. head: Presenting Petitions The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m pleased to rise today to present a petition from some good Albertans from the fine Alberta communities of Brooks, Lacombe, Fort McMurray, Fort Saskatche- wan, Sherwood Park, and the beautiful Stampede city of Calgary.

It reads: We the undersigned residents of Alberta, petition the Legislative Assembly to urge the Government of Alberta to prohibit the importation of temporary foreign workers to work on the construc- tion and/or maintenance of oil sands facilities and/or pipelines until the following groups have been accessed and/or trained: Unem- ployed Albertans and Canadians; Aboriginals; unemployed youth under 25; under-employed landed immigrants; and displaced farmers. There are 104 fine Albertans on this petition. Thank you. head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview. Mr.

Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to table on behalf of the hon. leader of the NDP opposition copies of

Alberta Hansard May 2, 20051154 the final report from the series of public hearings we held across Alberta. The hearings provided an opportunity for Albertans to share their vision for a strengthened health care system. Thank you. 2:50 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have one tabling this afternoon, and this is the most recently posted informa- tion, on April 25, 2005, of the current membership of Grid West. It lists here as active members the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, two representatives, Mr. Chan and Mr. Tiberi. Thank you.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Mr. Backs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings today. One is a notice of amendment to Bill 15, the Workers’ Compensa- tion Amendment Act, 2005. I have a second, which is also a notice of amendment to Bill 15, the Workers’ Compensation Amendment Act, 2005. I have the copies here. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. head: Orders of the Day head: Written Questions The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would move that written questions standing on the Order Paper today stand and retain their places with the exception of written questions 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31. [Motion carried] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Oil Sands Royalties Q24. Mr. MacDonald moved that the following question be accepted. How much additional revenue from synthetic crude oil and bitumen royalties does the Ministry and Department of Energy estimate will be collected per year once the royalty rate for oil sands projects increases to 25 per cent for the years 2005 to 2015? Mr.

MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This written question, if it was to be answered – and I certainly hope it will be – would provide all Albertans some information in regard to the long- term revenue forecast or projection for synthetic crude oil and bitumen royalty. Certainly, whenever we look at natural gas and by- products royalties and conventional crude oil royalties, they will be in significant decline by 2015 b ecause, particularly with conven- tional crude oil production, there will be significantly less even if the price remains at today’s levels or even goes higher.

The western Canadian sedimentary basin is a mature basin, and in light of our dependence as a government and as a province on natural resource royalties, it is an important question. When we look at synthetic crude oil production and the royalty holidays that some projects are having or are implemented under or are developed under in the oil sands, we see a 1 per cent royalty until all costs, including labour costs, are paid for. It’s a significant royalty holiday.

We’ve used this royalty holiday to attract billions and billions of dollars worth of investment, but at the same time we’re asking workers in those construction sites to work for less. The royalty rates are generous. When the capital costs and labour costs are paid off and we start collecting 25 per cent, exactly how much will we be getting? Now, if we go back to the budget, for instance, Mr. Speaker, for 2003 and we go to the business plan 2003-2006 on page 137, we will see that the target for the synthetic crude oil and bitumen royalty was $141 million.

If we compare it to this year’s budget, the estimate on the business plan for Energy at page 213, we see where there is close to $400 million estimated to be collected, $393 million to be precise. So that’s a significant increase. It has certainly more than doubled from the budget estimate of two years ago. If we look at the budget for this year, we again see synthetic crude oil and bitumen royalty estimates listed at $393 million. The forecast for the year before was $674 million. So there’s a significant range of estimates and targets here.

It’s interesting to note that for the fiscal year 2007-08 in the business plan for this year’s budget, it goes up as high as slightly over $700 million. If I could have the information as outlined in Written Question 24, I would be grateful. I would read it with a great deal of interest, and I’m sure other Albertans would, too, because there is an impression – whether it’s right or wrong, it’s not my job at this time to say – that this is a royalty giveaway. If this information could refute that impression, I think we would be doing the entire province a service. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Energy. Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. While I appreciate that it would be nice to be able to give that kind of information – he’s got from 2005 to 2015 – I’m going to have to reject Written Question 24 in the sense that we do publish the three years, but when you’re extrapolating out on the record, “Here’s what we expect royalties to be in an actual number,” it’s impossible to project one year out, let alone 10 more years out, what the price of oil is going to be, not just the price of oil but the differentials.

With bitumen, which is based on bitumen versus the synthetic crude levels, we’ve got to build some upgraders to make sure that we’ve got it to that level, to make sure that we reduce the amount of the differential. There are so many involved issues in getting to a calculation not just of the west Texas intermediate worldwide price of oil but then to get to a bitumen price and then even to project precisely all of the projects, the billions of dollars that are being invested over this next time, as to when they might precisely finish those megaprojects, when they’ll come on stream, at what volumes of production.

There’s so much activity that all we could do is start providing scenarios: here’s the range of possibilities. That doesn’t necessarily supply the information that’s requested so that we could give that projection. What we do is – you see that on page 213 in our business plan of Energy – provide the next three estimates of $393 million up to $560 million up to $710 million in each of those years.

The g ood thing that is happening, I guess, with respect to this is that with the higher price of oil we are seeing a faster payout of those projects with less volume so that we are going to start realizing sooner the higher rates of royalty. We’ve seen it already on some of Suncor’s. There are about 20 other smaller projects that have r eached payouts. We’re going to see it on Syncrude. Probably within the next year is projected for Syncrude. So we are starting to see that realized. We will do our best in our estimates to project that forward, but

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1155 going out for 10 years is just too far to make it worth the paper that it’s written on. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View. Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In looking at the importance of this issue – that is, royalties for Albertans – one of the key questions that many are asking me in my constituency is: given that the oil sands royalties are at about 1 per cent for well into the future, how can we be sure we’re getting our returns from a public re- source? 3:00 Indeed, the Auditor General in 2003 and ’04 recommended some changes in the way we’re assessing the royalty program for heavy oil in particular with a view to being more transparent, being more clear with Albertans about what could and should be expected of the returns on this public resource.

The findings that were reported at that time included a review of 10 approvals out of 48 active oil sands projects, identifying certain deficiencies, some of which the department is making progress on but others not. I quote here from page 128 of the Auditor’s report. With specific auditing of five projects out of 48 active projects they found that the risk assessment in five files was deficient because it did not deal with certain common risks to the Department.

For example, the risk that a project operator may have a history of making aggressive deductions, the risk of royalties being reduced by non-arm’s length sales or costs, the risk of duplicate costs being claimed in the project or in two projects owned by the same organization, or the risk that recovered costs are not being reported in full to the Department.

Secondly: For all five files, there was no indication of the nature of the work performed to ensure costs were eligible under OSR97 [which] requires that costs be directly attributable to the project, reasonable in the circumstances, incurred by or on behalf of the project owners, incurred on or after the effective date of the project, and incurred for one of ten purposes outlined. Finally, “all five files did not document that the costs were paid in the time period required by the OSR97”. So the question of royalties I think needs to be addressed.

I think the people of Alberta deserve to know just how long these are going to be deferred by new capital projects in order to maintain the 1 per cent royalty and that there is an accountable, transparent process to make sure that the huge resources and the huge potential revenues are addressed appropriately in this government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar to close the debate. Mr. MacDonald: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I must say that I’m very, very disappointed to hear from the hon. minister that we are not to receive that information.

Certainly, the taxpayers and people who rely on government programs would be also very, very disappointed to learn that this government for whatever reason – we can look at the price or we can look at the paydown of those development costs by those respective oil sands developers – may change, but someone over there must have an idea of where we’re going to be in the future. The minister certainly quotes page 213 of the business plan for the Department of Energy, but I would encourage the hon. minister and his staff, for that matter, to also look at page 209 of the same report. We’re talking in here, Mr.

Speaker, of oil production in thousands of barrels per day. We have oil sands production listed at 853,000, and going over to the year 2010 it doubles. Surely someone over there must know what kind of royalty take we’re going to get, where that production is coming from. Is it coming from fac ilities that have paid down their development costs, or is it from facilities that have yet to pay down their development costs?

These statistics are sourced from “Alberta’s Reserves 2003, Supply and Demand Outlook 2004-2013, Alberta Energy and Utilities Board.” So I would urge the hon. minister to take another look at this and perhaps visit the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and see if they now have information that is through to 2015 and give us, please, the informa- tion that we are requesting with Written Question 24. Mr.

Speaker, the National Energy Board is also a source for this information in the Department of Energy’s business plan. “National Energy Board: Canada’s Energy Future Supply; Scenarios for Supply and Demand to 2025; Supply Push Scenario.” So there are all kinds of places where I think the minister in all sincerity could get this information. We’re not asking for a figure that is going to be locked in stone, but certainly someone over there must know how we’re going to be able to finance this government’s expenditures in 2015 and what percentage of that will come from synthetic crude oil and bitumen royalty rates.

I think it’s again a very important question. I’m again disap- pointed and I’m dismayed as well with the hon. Minister of Energy for being so reluctant to provide this information. I think there are organizations that would help the Department of Energy out. I realize that they’re very busy these days trying to get a handle on electricity deregulation, but there have got to be some people over there that could perhaps phone the Energy and Utilities Board, the National Energy Board, or other departments to get this information. Perhaps the hon.

Minister of RAGE, Restructuring and Government Efficiency, could help out if the minister’s staff are all tied up trying to get a handle on and finding some solutions to electricity deregula- tion. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed. Thank you. [Written Question 24 lost] Student Loan Defaults Q25. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Mr. Taylor that the following question be accepted. What is the rate of default on Alberta student loans for students attending or graduating from all eligible institutions in Alberta broken down by institution over each of the fiscal years 1994-95 to 2003-04 inclusive?

The Speaker: The hon. Government House leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would indicate to the House and to the member who raised the question on behalf of the Member for Calgary-Currie that we would be prepared to accept the question provided that there were certain amendments which would make it more readily . . . An Hon. Member: Answerable? Mr. Hancock: Thank you. That was the word I was looking for: answerable.

I would therefore move an amendment to Written Question 25, that Written Question 25 be amended by striking out “attending or graduating from all eligible institutions in Alberta” and substituting “who have completed their studies,” striking out “institution” and substituting “last postsecondary sector attended,” striking out “fiscal” and substituting “academic,” and striking out “2003-04” and substituting “2002-03.”

Alberta Hansard May 2, 20051156 The amended written question would then read as follows: What is the rate of default on Alberta student loans for students who have completed their studies broken down by last postsecondary sector attended over each of the academic years 1994-95 to 2002-03 inclusive? Mr. Speaker, in moving that amendment I would just inform the hon. members that the institutional level of rate of default informa- tion is currently not shared publicly. Rather, the information is available at the sector levels, such as the university sector, college sector, et cetera. There are potential issues with respect to FOIP,

section 16 and

section 25, that may be harmful to the business interests of a private institution or economic or other interests of a public body.

There- fore, sharing the institution-by-i nstitution information, as I’ve indicated in response to a number of other questions that have been raised in the House earlier, would not be appropriate without having done the review and previously requested of the institutions affected the permission to share the information. 3:10 Now, as I indicated, we are reviewing that area and looking at the question of whether that type of information might be appropriate for students and parents and the public to have at hand in order to make appropriate determinations.

So as we go forward, we’re looking at the question as to i ndicating to institutions that that information will be shared, but with respect to historical information the advice we’ve received is that we would have to go back and make those requests, and that would be a significant pile of work to do. For that purpose, we’re proposing that the question be amended to provide it on the sector level as opposed to the institutional level for the purposes of this question, not necessarily for the purposes of for always.

Default information is tracked on the basis of people who have completed their studies in the specific year in question. Information for 2003-2004 is not available b ecause students who would have graduated in May 2004 would have a six-month gr ace period and then another six months before we consider the amount in default. That’s why we’ve amended it to move the year back one year, because there are, in fact, no defaults for the 2003-2004 year as yet. Management reports associated with defaults are based on school leavers from the May 1 to April 30 period, the academic year. That’s the reason for that amendment.

So, Mr. Speaker, I would move these amendments so that we can answer the questions in as appropriate a way as possible without moving into potential violations of FOIP and so that we can put the information into the categories in the manner in which it’s actually collected. The Speaker: On the amendment. Ms Blakeman: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I’m responding to the amend- ment that’s been proposed by the Minister of Advanced Education.

We believe that it’s important to be able to look at this issue of rate of default of Alberta student loans based on an institution-by- institution comparison, so that’s why we keep asking for the questions worded the way that we do. We’re not trying to be difficult. We just believe this is the way the information should be available not only to the opposition but, as the hon. minister noted, to the public and to the parents and students themselves. So I will protest again, but I understand why the minister has offered the amendment in the way that he has.

He did not comment or I didn’t hear clearly as to why there was an amendment around students “attending or graduating” to “have completed.” It doesn’t tell us what’s happening to student loans while they’re in their undergraduate years but, rather, just once they have completed their studies. We only get the final year rather than any of the intervening years and, again, not the total sum of informa- tion that we were looking for. So I question and protest that one as well. I understand what he’s saying about the sector.

I still insist on the institution, and of course it often happens that the ministry can only provide us information based on certain dates or in this case academic years rather than fiscal years and the notation that the minister has already done on the default rate, finishing the last year available. The rest of those changes are fine with us.

I still argue that we should be able to get and the ministry should be able to provide the institutional information, but I have instructions from the member whom I’m speaking on behalf of, that is the Member for Calgary- Currie, to accept the amendment with the protest that I’ve put on the record. Thank you very much. The Speaker: On the amendment, the hon. Member for Edmonton- Beverly-Clareview. Mr. Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is concerning to me, and I’d like to just enlarge on what the Member for Edmonton- Centre said. We’ve had a proliferation of private institutions in this province.

I’m sure that the minister has got complaints from time to time. We have to know what’s going on with these private institutions because students are paying out big money to go to them. They’re told that these institutions follow certain criteria, certain guidelines, and they get there, and it’s not what they expect. I’ve had complaints in the constituency about this. I guess the minister is saying that FOIP is involved here, and I’m not sure that I understand why. Surely this doesn’t ask for, you know, an individual student’s records or the rest of it; it’s asking for an institution’s.

Certainly, through student loans it’s public money going into these private institutions. Surely there should be some accountability here, Mr. Speaker. If we can get the information from the U of A or NAIT or SAIT or the U of C or Mount Royal or Grant MacEwan or whatever the case may be, the same accountability should be there for these private institutions. I don’t know how FOIP works to the minister. FOIP, I thought, was for personal information that might get out. If all of a sudden you’re asking how many graduated in a global sense from a particular institution, I can’t s ee how FOIP is involved in that.

You’re not asking for the individual names. You’re asking for an overall record of how many people graduated and how many didn’t. That seems to me pretty valuable information for parents if they’re looking at students that are looking around for various things because the last thing people want to do – I’ve heard of one case where a student ended up with a $13,000 debt and a useless course, so they’re not going to proceed. There’s got to be a way around this FOIP. If we’re going to give public money to private institutions, there has to be that accountabil- ity.

I’d like the minister at some point to indicate why FOIP is a necessity to protect the institution, the private institution. FOIP to me is for personal information, that you wouldn’t put out particular students or names, but you certainly should have a record of how many are in the school, how many are passing, and what’s happen- ing there. So I’d ask, you know, on the amendment as to why that is the case. I know we’ll get FOIP all the way along on some of these, and I think it’s important for us to know. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Motion on amendment carried]

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1157 The Speaker: On the question as amended. Hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre, do you wish to close the debate? Ms Blakeman: Yes. Please close debate. [Written Question 25 as amended carried] Student Loan Maximums Q26. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Mr. Taylor that the following question be accepted. What is the total number and percentage of Alberta student loan program applicants receiving the maximum allowable loan over each of the academic or administrative years 2000 to 2003-04 inclusive broken down by year, learning institu- tion, and program of applicant? The Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Advanced Education. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once again I would indicate to the House and to the member raising the question that we would be prepared to accept Written Question 26 provided that it was amended to allow for us to provide the information in a compliant way. Therefore, I would move that Written Question 26 be amended by striking out “learning institution, and program of applicant” and substituting “undergraduate or lower program category, and graduate/professional program category.” 3:20 Mr.

Speaker, the reason for proposing the amendment is that information on maximum allowable loans issued is tracked at the undergraduate or lower program level and at the gradu- ate/professional program level only and not by learning institution or specific program of applicant. So getting the information, other than going through an extensive manual process to provide that information, could not be readily done. With the amendment we can at least provide information which could be made available based on the program level of study rather than by institution.

We are spending a considerable amount of resources in upgrading the technology that’s available. I’m sure that with that upgrade there will be many variable fields available, and perhaps we’ll be able to extract information in a number and varied ways. But at the present time, as I am given to understand it, providing the information in the way in which it was asked, if not impossible, would require a huge amount of manual work. The Speaker: On the amendment. Ms Blakeman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, you know, I want to be efficient with use of resources here, but it is highly question- able to me that this information is not tracked by institution. I, of course, will take the member’s word that it is not, but I still find that very curious. It does not allow us to compare between. In addition, it’s not allowing us to compare between what we would call the public system and private offerers as well, as was raised by my colleague the Member for Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview, which I think is an excellent point, especially as we move into an age where there are more private providers of education.

We should be able to compare between institutions, especially when we’re talking about student loans and those who have maxed out their possible loan program. The second question that occurs to me is that in this question the minister is telling me that numbers are available from undergraduate and lower program categories and graduate/professional program categories, yet in the previous ques tion he told me that that wasn’t available. It was only available for graduating as a final: “who have completed their studies.” I’ll let the member explain to me on the record, then, what the difference is between those two.

What strikes me is that the undergraduates appear to be available in this question. These are relatively similar questions. I’d like to know why it’s not available in the previous question. Again, I have instructions from the sponsoring member to accept the amendments from the minister, but if I may, I strongly suggest that we do look at tracking by institution. I’m very curious that we don’t. I think that if that is truly an oversight, it’s one that we need to address immediately. Thank you. [Motion on amendment carried] The Speaker: Hon.

Member for Edmonton-Centre, do you choose to close the debate, or should I call the question? [Written Question 26 as amended carried] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Student Loan Appeals Q27. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Mr. Taylor that the following question be accepted. What is the total number of Alberta student loan program applicants who have appealed their award over each of the academic/administrative years 2000-01 to 2003-04 inclusive broken down by year, learning institution, reason for appeal, and whether the appeal was successful? Ms Blakeman: Thank you.

Now, there is an extensive amendment, which the minister, I’m sure, will get up and go through. Once again, I note that we are unable to be provided with information broken down by institution, which ag ain I think is an oversight. I look forward to the reasons that the minister will give for amending this written question, which I have now moved. Thank you. [Mr. Shariff in the chair] The Acting Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With respect to the last two written questions there was a significant difference between the two in that with respect to 25 we’re talking about school leavers or graduands and default rates as opposed to the other one, which was maximum loans. The information is categorized and available in different ways depending on whether they’re in the default category or the other category. I don’t profess to be an expert on all of this stuff, but that’s what I’m advised. So there was a significant difference between those two questions.

With respect to Question 27 I would indicate that we’re prepared to accept this question. Again, it would have to be with an amend- ment. I would move to amend Written Question 27 by striking out “learning institution.” The question, then, as amended would be: What is the total number of Alberta student loan program applicants who have appealed their award over each of the aca- demic/administrative years 2000-01 to 2003-04 inclusive broken down by year, reason for appeal, and whether the appeal was successful? Mr. Speaker, in moving that amendment, I’d indicate that all

Alberta Hansard May 2, 20051158 we’re doing is taking out the request to break it down as well by learning institution. While I’m sure that the same arguments apply with respect to this question as had been raised in the other ones – and I have to say that I don’t n ecessarily disagree with those arguments; I think that information might be useful – the fact appears to be that we don’t have it in that manner. Appeals are tracked by reason code, not by l earning institution or any other format, so apparently we’re unable to fulfill the request by learning institution.

Management reports identify successful appeals based on commencement of study period and unsuccessful appeals based on the date they entered the system. This is extra information just so that when the answer is provided, it can be provided in a context that you might understand it. Also, a number of appeals remain pending for periods of time awaiting additional information from the applicant. Therefore, in any given fiscal year the total number of appeals approved and rejected does not equal the number of appeals actually received in a given year.

Just so that you know, when we do get the information, the reason why it doesn’t add up is because of the different methodologies with respect to successful appeals, rejected appeals, and the timing of appeals. We have 56 different appeal reason codes, and of course applicants may have more than one reason for their appeal, so that would be another reason why the information might not appear to add up.

We’d be happy to provide the information with respect to appeals provided that the requirement to do it by learning institution is taken out because, again, the management systems that we have right now apparently don’t break it down in that fashion. [Motion on amendment carried] [Written Question 27 as amended carried] The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Theft of Public Property Q28. Mr. R. Miller moved on behalf of Mr. Bonko that the following question be accepted.

What is the total dollar amount of public property lost due to theft in the Department of Sustainable Resource Develop- ment for the 2003-2004 fiscal year? Mr. R. Miller: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I think the reason for asking the question is quite self evident, and I will happily await the response from the hon. minister. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Minister of Human Resources and Employment. Mr. Cardinal: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development I would be pleased to accept Written Question 28.

The Acting Speaker: Any other questions? [Written Question 28 carried] 3:30 Full-day Kindergarten Q29. Mr. Flaherty moved that the following question be accepted. What consultations, studies, research, or other information- gathering exercises pertaining to full-day kindergarten are currently planned or under way under the auspices of the Ministry of Education? The Acting Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m pleased to indicate on behalf of my ministry and the government that we will accept Written Question 29 as it stands. [Written Question 29 carried] Calgary Ward 10 Election Process Investigation Q30. Mr. Flaherty moved on behalf of Dr. Taft that the following question be accepted. What is the total dollar amount spent by the Department of Municipal Affairs on the investigation into Calgary’s ward 10 election process following the October 2004 municipal election? The Acting Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Stevens: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On behalf of the Minister of Municipal Affairs I’m going to i ndicate to the House that we are prepared to accept Written Question 30 with some amendments. This information was shared with the opposition prior to 11 o’clock this morning, as per procedures, and I’d ask that the amendment be circulated if it hasn’t already. Briefly, Mr. Speaker, the rationale behind amending the first part of this question is because the process is ongoing. Therefore, to answer a question as to what the total costs are before the process is finished is not possible.

The other minor change replaces the word “investigation” with “provincial inspection.” This adjustment adds clarity and accuracy to the question. The amended written question will read as follows then: As of March 31, 2005, what is the total dollar amount spent by the Department of Municipal Affairs on the provincial inspection into Calgary’s ward 10 election process following the October 2004 municipal election? [Motion on amendment carried] [Written Question 30 as amended carried] The Clerk Assistant: Written Question 31. Dr. Pannu.

The Acting Speaker: There being no mover for the motion, the motion will be dropped from the Order Paper. head: Motions for Returns The Acting Speaker: The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s unfortunate there was no mover for that last one because we might have been able to actually accept it. However, let’s move on. Proper notice having been given on Thursday, April 28, I’m pleased to move that motions for returns 27 through 43 inclusive be dealt with today. Mr.

Speaker, I might just add, there being no additional motions for returns, there are none to stand and retain their places following this motion. [Motion carried]

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1159 Software Licences for Schools M27. Mr. Flaherty moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing a copy of all documents including but not limited to letters, faxes, memos, meeting notes, reports, contracts, and competing bids related to the October 2004 agreement between the government and Microsoft Inc. for the provision of Microsoft Office software to Alberta’s educational institutions. Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr.

Speaker, this particular motion is directed to Alberta Education and also partly to Advanced Education, and I want to indicate to the hon. member that I’m prepared to accept this on behalf of government albeit with some amendments. I believe that the amendment on 27 has been circulated, and all members should have a copy of it now. In addition, I should just point out quickly that this information has been shared as of 11 this morning with the opposition colleague, which is, of course, the requirement as per our procedure.

Assuming that all members have now had a chance to look at it, I just want to indicate that this matter requires just a little bit of background information. If I might just speak to the amendment at this time, I would indicate the following. First of all, the contract in question deals with Microsoft Inc., and since the vast majority of school jurisdictions and postsecondary institutions in our province were already using Microsoft Office software, it was deemed best to enter into a broad, province-wide agreement that would reflect that particular fact.

So the provincial Microsoft licensing agreement in effect was arrived at, and it actually is going to save the educational system in this province in both sectors, K to 12 and postsecondary, about $10 million over three years. That will be done by achieving some economies of scale. So that results in a cost savings of approxi- mately 25 to 40 per cent. I thought that that information might be sort of important to have on the table.

Now, the scope of the information the way it was originally requested, however, in this particular motion for a return would have been rather extensive and would have required us to go back to October 2002, which would have meant spending considerable amounts of time and other resources to provide something akin to an answer for what was asked for. In any case, Mr.

Speaker, due to the business considerations by the various entities that are invo lved, including some competitive advantage considerations, it would have become necessary to consult with Microsoft Canada as well as with a very large number of account resellers that participated in the bidding process, and that would likely have proven to be an extremely lengthy and overly involved process, which, even after it had been attempted, might not have yielded precisely what the member was requesting in the first place. As I’ve indicated, this is an important motion. I recognize that.

I should just indicate very quickly that prior to this particular agreement having been arrived at, Mr. Speaker, the school jurisdic- tions as well as the postsecondary institutions actually had separate agreements, which came out of their own technology budgets. Now, however, because our government decided to step in and take care of those costs directly ourselves as a government on behalf of the jurisdictions and the schools boards and the institutions and so on, we have been able to see a number of dollars freed up, which are dollars that now can be directed to other education priorities.

So that sort of explains a little bit of the rationale behind it as well. In the final analysis, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to accept this motion with the amendments that have been circulated, and I would just now like to read that proposed amended motion into the record, which I hope will suffice and accommodate the hon. member opposite and his query.

That a copy of the October 2004 agreement between the government and Microsoft Inc. for the provision of Microsoft Office software to Alberta’s educational institutions and related documents including requests for quotations, list of vendor applicants, and other materials be provided as required. With that, Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat and look for the support of the House on the motion as amended and moved. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. 3:40 Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, and thank you for the explanation from the minister.

I’m assuming, then, that he can provide us with supporting documentation for the claims of savings that he has just made, which is by way of reasoning for why the amendment is being modified in the way that it has been. To me, Mr. Speaker, what the Official Opposition was looking for was transparency in a process. We’re often told, “Oh, you know, you can view the contracts” and “You’ll have a look at everything” and “Everyone can look at it themselves and figure out if everyone thinks that it’s a good deal.” But when we actually come right down to it: “Oh, well, sorry.

No, you can’t now look at this contract because it’s covered under solicitor/client privilege” or “It’s covered under FOIP” or “Sorry; you can’t see it.” So all the great promises of transparency and accountability are gone because they’re now all cloaked in some sort of after-the-fact reasoning. So if the minister is telling me that this is all going to be available, good. Then I’m glad we’re on the record here with Hansard. I’m sure he’ll be providing that information directly to the sponsor of the motion for a return. I do want to see any supporting documents that he has in support of his claims of savings.

Secondly, I’m not specifically familiar with this, but I take it that the October 2004 agreement between the government and Microsoft has not already been released in some other form and that, therefore, this is something new that is now being released by the government, when the amended order shows that a copy of this agreement will be provided. We were looking for quite a bit of detail that led up to the agreement. What all was involved in the negotiation? That’s what we wanted to see. We also wanted to see, you know, notes and other things that help people make decisions about this.

What did the contracts look like, for example, and the competing bids? Now, I don’t know if in the minister’s opinion a list of vendor applicants – that’s not the same as competing bids, and request for quotations is not the same as competing bids. So we’re not getting what we asked for here. We’re getting quite a different thing entirely. We asked for a whale and we’re getting a fish. They both swim in water, but beyond that, there isn’t a lot of connection between the two of them.

Nonetheless, being in the opposition in this particular Assembly, we’re always grateful for any information that we can manage to squeeze out of the government. I’m sure the member is likely to support the amended motion. Nonetheless, I felt it important to get the rest of those points on the record. Thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Speaker. [Motion on amendment carried] The Acting Speaker: Hon. Member for St. Albert, would you like to close debate? Mr. Flaherty: It’s closed, sir. [Motion for a Return 27 as amended carried]

Alberta Hansard May 2, 20051160 Postsecondary Tuition Fee Documentation M28. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Mr. Taylor that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing a copy of all documents including reports, studies, statistical data, stake- holder submissions, meeting agendas, and correspondence prepared or received by the Ministry of Advanced Education, formerly Learning, between January 1, 2002, and February 28, 2005, relating to legislation or regulations governing Alberta’s postsecondary tuition fees. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m going to ask the House to reject this motion, and I do that with some regret because, actually, I had wanted to accept the motion, but the material that I’ve received again indicates that a considerable am ount of time – the estimate is about 30 days – would have to be spent in reviewing the requested stakeholder submissions to determine which portions would be exempted from disclosure according to FOIP.

Now, I’m not too certain as to what in stakeholders’ submissions would fall into a FOIP designation, but I’m uncomfortable enough with the advice that I wouldn’t want an order from the Legislature to return the information if indeed it was to violate the FOIP Act. In addition, we’ve been advised that a further consultation with applicable institutions would be wi se prior to the releasing of the information.

So while this is a question which I would be happy to provide as much information as I possibly can on, because of the nature of the advice I’ve received relative to FOIP, I s hould have brought forward an amendment to say: subject to the requirements of FOIP. Then I would have found it acceptable. But I didn’t do that on a timely basis, so unfortunately I’m going to have to ask the House to reject the question. Ms Blakeman: Well, yes, it is most unfortunate.

I will hold the minister to his comments in Hansard, to promising to provide as much of this information as he can without coming up against the constraints of FOIP. Mr. Speaker, this is a perfect example of why the Official Opposition and members of the public get so frustrated with this government. That Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act was meant to share information of what was going on behind closed doors with government, and it has turned into exactly the opposite. It is about protecting and keeping information from the very people who should be able to see and scrutinize it.

I’m not specifically criticizing the Minister of Advanced Educa- tion in this particular case because I believe him to be an honourable man, but this is an increasing problem with this government. It is very indicative of its reluctance to release information and allow their decision-making to be a transparent process so that members of the Official Opposition, the third-party opposition, the single member of the fourth-party opposition, and members of the public can in fact follow along and make sure that they’re in agreement with everything that’s happened.

It’s important to know how government arrives at decision-making. Here we’ve had several things happen around tuition fees in Alberta, and we can’t tell how the government arrived at that decision. This is what people find frustrating. This is what leads people to find the government, you know, full of secrets and working behind closed doors and deal-making and all those other stereotypes which are heaped upon them. This is what makes people believe they’re true.

I know that we’ve had reviews of the freedom of information and protection of privacy legislation, but I also note: those are all-party reviews, and the membership on those reviews are reflective of the number of seats held in the House. So we end up with a Tory majority who once again votes that secrecy through. There’s something really, really wrong with this system when members of the public cannot see how the government came to make its decisions. This is a perfect example of something that should be straightforward and easily accessible to everyone that is now cloaked in secrecy that doesn’t need to be.

It does raise people’s suspicions and impairs the government’s credibility when it tries to make claims of being open and accessible. It is obviously not. [Motion for a Return 28 lost] The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Alberta SuperNet Project M29. Mr. Elsalhy moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing a copy of all documents pertaining to the government’s decision to transfer responsibility for the Alberta SuperNet project from the Ministry of Innovation and Science to the Ministry of Restructuring and Govern- ment Efficiency. Mr. Elsalhy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is something that has been on my mind as the critic for Innovation and Science and also on people’s minds because the transfer happened immediately, with no warning signs, after the November election. The newly formed ministry was established, and it a ppears that they just wanted to create some sort of an agenda or a mandate for this new ministry. I would be real eager to receive information on the rationale behind this decision and why it was deemed to be appropriate and timely. Thank you. 3:50 The Acting Speaker: The hon. Minister of Restructuring and Government Efficiency. Mr. Ouellette: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. The government is prepared to accept this motion. [Motion for a Return 29 carried] Accreditation Approval for University of Phoenix M30. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Mr.

Taylor that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing a copy of all documents pertaining to the government’s approval for the University of Phoenix to offer accredited baccalaureate or master’s level degrees in Alberta including but not limited to all submissions by the University of Phoenix to the Private Colleges Accreditation Board, PCAB, written decisions, or recommendations by the PCAB to the Ministry of Advanced Education, formerly Learning, correspondence between ministry officials and representatives of the Univer- sity of Phoenix, and the ministerial order or order in council granting the approval.

The Acting Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’d earlier circulated a proposed amendment with respect to this motion for a return, but on further review, I’m going to ask the House to actually reject this motion for a return. The reason for that is that we’ve dealt substan- tively with the issues provided fo r in this motion for a return in

May 2, 2005 Alberta Hansard 1161 responding to Motion for a Return 2 and Motion for a Return 3, as proposed by the Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, accepted as amended on April 11, 2005. The amendments that I was going to propose to this motion would have essentially put us in the same position, that we’d be providing the same information that we already agreed to provide, which is the letters of authorization and the other information regarding information relied upon. This is substantially the same motion that has already been approved.

Therefore, rather than go through the process of amend- ment, I just ask that the Assembly reject this one, and we’ll respond as we’ve already promised with respect to motions for returns 2 and 3. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre to close debate. Ms Blakeman: Thank you.

Well, given that the minister feels that it’s essentially the same answer to the same question, then I’m asking that any information that is provided to the third party in response to their questions 2 and 3 also be forwarded to the Member for Calgary-Currie if the minister feels that it answers the questions he’s raised, the documents that he has requested actually under Motion for a Return 30. Thank you. [Motion for a Return 30 lost] Student Loan Repayment Systems M31. Ms Blakeman moved on behalf of Mr.

Taylor that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing a copy of all documents currently in the possession of the Ministry of Advanced Education including but not limited to reports, studies, statistical data, and correspondence pertaining to income-contingent student loan repayment systems. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of government I’d be prepared to accept this motion for a return. In accepting the motion for a return, I would just provide some information to the House.

We’re not currently actively reviewing income-contingent student loan repayment systems. The current position – this is, of course, subject to the full review of affordability that will be taking place this year, so it could be subject to change – is that strategies are needed to ensure that debt levels are manageable upon comple- tion of studies.

Programs to support debt management take many different forms, including interest relief, combined grants and loans, or through the Alberta student loan relief program, and it’s not felt that it makes sense to provide loans to individuals whose income potential would make it virtually impossible for them to ever repay, even under an income-contingent repayment plan. For those reasons we haven’t been actively engaged in looking at income-contingent repayment plans although, certainly, that’s an option which could be or would be or should be on the table as we look at the affordability review.

It should be noted, as well, that as part of the pan-Canadian ongoing review of students’ assistance the federal government, along with the provinces, is looking at debt management as a topic for review. Possible future options like income-contingency repayment, graduated interest relief, and other options will be on the table. I think those are issues that will be explored more fully both in terms of

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20050502
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L26 S1 20050502 1330 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	61f546f3eeb125b5b8d368db9e9e3dc4e2a99a1f

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