Province of Alberta The 27th Legislature Second Session Alberta Hansard Wednesday, April 29, 2009 Issue 32 The Honourable Kenneth R. Kowalski, Speaker

Legislative Assembly of Alberta The 27th Legislature Second Session Kowalski, Hon. Ken, Barrhead-Morinville-Westlock, Speaker Cao, Wayne C.N., Calgary-Fort, Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees Mitzel, Len, Cypress-Medicine Hat, Deputy Chair of Committees Ady, Hon. Cindy, Calgary-Shaw (PC), Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation Allred, Ken, St.

Albert (PC) Amery, Moe, Calgary-East (PC) Anderson, Rob, Airdrie-Chestermere (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Solicitor General and Public Security Benito, Carl, Edmonton-Mill Woods (PC) Berger, Evan, Livingstone-Macleod (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Sustainable Resource Development Bhardwaj, Naresh, Edmonton-Ellerslie (PC) Bhullar, Manmeet Singh, Calgary-Montrose (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Advanced Education and Technology Blackett, Hon.

Lindsay, Calgary-North West (PC), Minister of Culture and Community Spirit Blakeman, Laurie, Edmonton-Centre (AL), Deputy Leader of the Official Opposition Official Opposition House Leader Boutilier, Guy C., Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo (PC) Brown, Dr. Neil, QC, Calgary-Nose Hill (PC) Calahasen, Pearl, Lesser Slave Lake (PC) Campbell, Robin, West Yellowhead (PC), Deputy Government Whip Chase, Harry B., Calgary-Varsity (AL), Official Opposition Whip Dallas, Cal, Red Deer-South (PC) Danyluk, Hon. Ray, Lac La Biche-St.

Paul (PC), Minister of Municipal Affairs DeLong, Alana, Calgary-Bow (PC) Denis, Jonathan, Calgary-Egmont (PC) Doerksen, Arno, Strathmore-Brooks (PC) Drysdale, Wayne, Grande Prairie-Wapiti (PC) Elniski, Doug, Edmonton-Calder (PC) Evans, Hon. Iris, Sherwood Park (PC), Minister of Finance and Enterprise Fawcett, Kyle, Calgary-North Hill (PC) Forsyth, Heather, Calgary-Fish Creek (PC) Fritz, Hon. Yvonne, Calgary-Cross (PC), Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs Goudreau, Hon.

Hector G., Dunvegan-Central Peace (PC), Minister of Employment and Immigration Griffiths, Doug, Battle River-Wainwright (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Agriculture and Rural Development Groeneveld, Hon. George, Highwood (PC), Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Hancock, Hon. Dave, QC, Edmonton-Whitemud (PC), Minister of Education, Government House Leader Hayden, Hon. Jack, Drumheller-Stettler (PC), Minister of Infrastructure Hehr, Kent, Calgary-Buffalo (AL) Horne, Fred, Edmonton-Rutherford (PC) Horner, Hon. Doug, Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St.

Albert (PC), Minister of Advanced Education and Technology Jablonski, Hon. Mary Anne, Red Deer-North (PC), Minister of Seniors and Community Supports Jacobs, Broyce, Cardston-Taber-Warner (PC) Johnson, Jeff, Athabasca-Redwater (PC) Johnston, Art, Calgary-Hays (PC) Kang, Darshan S., Calgary-McCall (AL) Klimchuk, Hon. Heather, Edmonton-Glenora (PC), Minister of Service Alberta Knight, Hon. Mel, Grande Prairie-Smoky (PC), Minister of Energy Leskiw, Genia, Bonnyville-Cold Lake (PC) Liepert, Hon. Ron, Calgary-West (PC), Minister of Health and Wellness Lindsay, Hon.

Fred, Stony Plain (PC), Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security Lukaszuk, Thomas A., Edmonton-Castle Downs (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Municipal Affairs Lund, Ty, Rocky Mountain House (PC) MacDonald, Hugh, Edmonton-Gold Bar (AL) Marz, Richard, Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills (PC) Mason, Brian, Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood (NDP), Leader of the NDP Opposition McFarland, Barry, Little Bow (PC) McQueen, Diana, Drayton Valley-Calmar (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Environment Morton, Hon.

F.L., Foothills-Rocky View (PC), Minister of Sustainable Resource Development Notley, Rachel, Edmonton-Strathcona (NDP), Deputy Leader of the NDP Opposition, NDP Opposition House Leader Oberle, Frank, Peace River (PC), Government Whip Olson, Verlyn, QC, Wetaskiwin-Camrose (PC) Ouellette, Hon. Luke, Innisfail-Sylvan Lake (PC), Minister of Transportation Pastoor, Bridget Brennan, Lethbridge-East (AL), Deputy Official Opposition Whip Prins, Ray, Lacombe-Ponoka (PC) Quest, Dave, Strathcona (PC) Redford, Hon. Alison M., QC, Calgary-Elbow (PC), Minister of Justice and Attorney General Renner, Hon.

Rob, Medicine Hat (PC), Minister of Environment, Deputy Government House Leader Rodney, Dave, Calgary-Lougheed (PC) Rogers, George, Leduc-Beaumont-Devon (PC) Sandhu, Peter, Edmonton-Manning (PC) Sarich, Janice, Edmonton-Decore (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Education Sherman, Dr. Raj, Edmonton-Meadowlark (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Health and Wellness Snelgrove, Hon. Lloyd, Vermilion-Lloydminster (PC), President of the Treasury Board Stelmach, Hon. Ed, Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville (PC), Premier, President of Executive Council Stevens, Hon.

Ron, QC, Calgary-Glenmore (PC), Deputy Premier, Minister of International and Intergovernmental Relations Swann, Dr. David, Calgary-Mountain View (AL), Leader of the Official Opposition Taft, Dr. Kevin, Edmonton-Riverview (AL) Tarchuk, Hon. Janis, Banff-Cochrane (PC), Minister of Children and Youth Services Taylor, Dave, Calgary-Currie (AL) VanderBurg, George, Whitecourt-Ste.

Anne (PC) Vandermeer, Tony, Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview (PC) Weadick, Greg, Lethbridge-West (PC) Webber, Len, Calgary-Foothills (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Energy Woo-Paw, Teresa, Calgary-Mackay (PC) Xiao, David H., Edmonton-McClung (PC), Parliamentary Assistant, Employment and Immigration Zwozdesky, Hon. Gene, Edmonton-Mill Creek (PC), Minister of Aboriginal Relations, Deputy Government House Leader Officers and Officials of the Legislative Assembly Clerk W.J. David McNeil Clerk Assistant/ Director of House Services Louise J. Kamuchik Clerk of Journals/Table Research Micheline S.

Gravel Senior Parliamentary Counsel Robert H. Reynolds, QC Senior Parliamentary Counsel Shannon Dean Sergeant-at-Arms Brian G. Hodgson Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms J. Ed Richard Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms William C. Semple Managing Editor of Alberta Hansard Liz Sim

April 29, 2009 Alberta Hansard 871 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Wednesday, April 29. 2009 1:30 p.m. 1:30 p.m. Wednesday, April 29, 2009 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Welcome. Let us pray. Grant that we the members of our province’s Legislature fulfill our office with honesty and integrity. May our first concern be for the good of all our citizens. Let us be guided by these principles in our deliberations this day. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Infrastructure. Mr. Hayden: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a visiting group from the Lakeview Christian school in the constitu- ency of Drumheller-Stettler. These are some wonderful grade 7 to grade 9 students, with their teachers, Miss Grace Yoder and Mr. Wayne Toews, and accompanied by parents Mrs. Sharon Toews, Mr. Keith Klassen, and Mrs. Kathy Klassen. I would now ask them to please rise and receive the warm traditional welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Rutherford. Mr. Horne: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my privilege today to introduce to you and through you to all members 53 students from Rideau Park elementary school in my constituency of Edmonton-Rutherford. There are 27 students seated in the mem- bers’ gallery, and I believe 24 students – and they’ll be wondering if I can add – seated in the public gallery. They’re accompanied by their teachers, Mrs. Tara Jones-Whitford and Mrs. Tanja Burns. I’d like to ask all of them to please rise and receive our very warm welcome. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathmore-Brooks. Mr. Doerksen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly this afternoon a group of 20 grade 7 students from Rosemary school, including one that’s particularly close to me, my niece Lindsey Doerksen. They’re accompanied today by their sc hool principal, Mr. David Blumell, and parent helpers Mrs. Pam Norton, Mr. Arnold Retzlaff, Mr. Russ Pickett, Mrs. Yvonne Doerksen, Mrs. Jan Lepp, Mr. Cliff Walde, Mrs. Loretta Berg, and Mrs. Kristie Hall. I’d like to ask them all to rise and enjoy the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Mr.

Lukaszuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two sets of introductions today. First of all, I have 34 fabulous students visiting our Legislature today from St. Lucy Catholic elementary school. They’re accompanied by two teachers, Ms Dawn Miskew and Mrs. Karen Robinson. I would ask them to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of our Assembly. Also, Mr. Speaker, it’s my pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to members of this Assembly nine young high school students who formed a group called Erin and friends because they wanted to make a difference in our community.

These students from Jasper Place high school arrange time away from class so that they can volunteer for Habitat for Humanity, a nonprofit organization that works with volunteers and builders to build affordable housing. With us today are Erin Austen, Mariève Langevin, Kyla Stoodley, Jocelyn McCaw, Megan Mah, Monique Mah, Emily Dyck, Jennie Austen, and Monica Winstone. Accompanying them is Mr. Alfred Nikolai, president and CEO of Habitat for Humanity since 2005. Mr. Alfred Nikolai is a charismatic individual. He started building six homes per year; now they’re building over 30 homes per year.

I would ask them to rise and receive the warm welcome of our Assembly. Mr. Cao: It gives me great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to all Members of the Legislative Assembly the community sponsors of the School at the Legislature. Seated in your gallery, Mr. Speaker, from Priority Printing Limited Mr. Tim Downey, president; Mr. Lloyd Lewis, vice-president and general manager, CTV; Mr. Eric Rice, production and interactive, A ccess TV; Mr. David Fisher, production and interactive, Access TV; from the Rotary Club of Edmonton Mr. Jack Clements and Mr.

Bill Hamilton, youth services committee; from CKUA Radio Network Mr. Ken Regan, general manager, and Ms Sharon Marcus, director of development; and finally, Mr. Ron LaFranchise, a volunteer. The School at the Legislature program gives grade 6 teachers from all over the province an opportunity to relocate their classroom to the Alberta Legislature for a week. I would ask our guests to rise and receive a warm welcome from our Legislative Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne. Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s a pleasure to rise today and introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly three individuals seated in the members’ gallery. With us this afternoon are Mr. J.F. Turcotte, president of the National Smokeless Tobacco Company; Mr. Jeremy Adams, director of government relations for the NST; and Jim Dau, no stranger to this Assembly, from Prismatic Group. The National Smokeless Tobacco Company is based in the province of Quebec but does substantial business here in our province. They’re here today visiting MLAs to talk about issues important to their industry.

Would they please rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m just delighted to welcome back to Alberta Richard Engelhardt. Richard is sitting in the public gallery. He worked for me for a number of years as my constituency assistant and manager. I keep losing constituency assistants because I convince them to go back and finish their degrees, which is what he did. He went off to UBC to complete his degree, so he’s back for the summer.

Richard, would you rise and allow us to welcome you to the Alberta Legislature. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Employment and Immigration. Mr. Goudreau: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I have the privilege of introducing to you and through you to Members of the Legislative Assembly a number of staff from Alberta Employment and Immigration who are visiting the Legislature today. They play a very important role in keeping Alberta workplaces safe and fair.

Alberta Hansard April 29, 2009872 I would ask our guests to stand as I introduce them: Kelechi Madu, Muneer Naseer, Teresa McKinnon, Roy Clough, Fazal Hussain, Gita Sud, Angela Curtis, Jane Kieser, Bernice Doyle, and Gayle Joyes- Bond. I would ask my guests to stand and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Service Alberta. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise today and introduce to you and through you to this Assembly 11 workers from Alberta Care Resources.

Alberta Care Resources is a private child, youth, and family support agency within the constitu- ency of Edmonton-Glenora. They’ve provided 15 years of service to the Edmonton community and have provided quality programs, serving diverse client and community needs for every one of those 15 years. I’d like to introduce the individuals here: Ms Sunny Thaleshvar, Mrs. Aly Fergus, Mr. Brian LaBelle, Mrs. Becky Kiryluk, Mr. Shane Whippler, Miss Katie Grant, Mr. Jack Johnson, Ms Sylvia Reynolds, Miss Michelle Crawford, Mrs. Donna Smith, and Miss Vanessa Wyard-Scott.

I’d like to welcome all of these individuals to the Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Advanced Education and Technology. Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is indeed a pleasure for me to rise and introduce to you and through you to members of the Assembly four guests seated in the members’ gallery. Growing up in rural Alberta, I knew of the UFA as the co-op, or the co-operative. They’re a hundred years old this year. I knew of them in the fuel business and the farm business, but they’re also in the construction business.

I’m introducing to the Assembly today the four people attending on behalf of the UFA Construction company, who bid on a luncheon with me at the St. Albert Housing Society fundraising breakfast in March. I would ask that each of them stand to receive the warm welcome of this Assembly as I call their name. They are Bill Hutchings, Gregg Shoemaker, Darryl Hartigh, and Reid Lillico. We had a great discussion around P3 concepts, Mr. Speaker. I would ask that the Assembly give them a warm welcome. 1:40 The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Seniors and Community Supports. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today it’s my great pleasure to introduce to you and through you to members of this Assembly a very good friend of mine, Cheryl Davis. Cheryl is the owner-manager of two of Alberta’s finest registries, the One Stop Licence Shop in Red Deer-North and in Red Deer-South. She has also been the very successful manager of my last four election campaigns. She’s a very successful businesswoman, a very thoughtful and loyal friend, and a very hard-working member of the PC Party.

Cheryl is in the members’ gallery, and I would ask her to rise and receive the warm welcome of the House. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Athabasca-Redwater. Education Week Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This week we are celebrat- ing Education Week across Alberta. This year’s theme, Learning Connections: Celebrating Student Engagement, speaks to the past, present, and future needs and successes of our students. The theme also reflects a natural and very powerful urge within the education community to effect positive change.

It recognizes that we are strongest when we stand and work together. Today Alberta is renowned for a high quality of educational programming available to all our citizens. That is today, but what about tomorrow? Education is the basis of a su ccessful, open, and progressive society. We thrive if Albertans of the future are truly an educated people; we fail if they are not. As a parent and as an elected official I am acutely aware of the challenges in preparing our children for a future that may be very different from today.

We seriously need to rethink how we design our education system so that it continues to meet the needs of learners 20 years from now. I’m very pleased to be co-chair of the steering committee for Inspiring Education: A Dialogue with Albertans, which kicked off the first of 10 community conversations this morning. We are asking a fundamental question to Albertans about our future: what qualities and abilities will future Albertans need to be successful and contributing citizens? When you ask Albertans this question, they will have many ideas.

From oil rig workers to farmers, from businesspeople to community leaders, from First Nations peoples to newly arrived Albertans, we all have the right, the obligation to bring our ideas, our dreams, and our hopes forward for this discussion. We need to hear all voices and all points of view. Education belongs to the entire community and to all Albertans. The future prosperity and success of Alberta, the Alberta of our children and our grandchildren, is dependent on our efforts and our commitment to education today. Mr.

Speaker, during Education Week 2009 let us take some time to consider the value and importance of education to our lives now and in the future. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Partners in Injury Reduction Mr. Xiao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On April 23 I was privileged to attend the annual WCB partners in injury reduction luncheon. I would like to congratulate the safety and industry associations who serve as certifying partners and the employers who participate in this program.

Their hard work and their dedication in this joint program between the Workers’ Compensation Board and Alberta Employ- ment and Immigration is paying off. The latest projections from the WCB are that the number of lost- time injuries on Alberta work sites went down again significantly, from 35,900 in 2007 to 32,800 in 2008. This is a huge achievement on its own, Mr. Speaker, and even a bigger one because the number of workers covered by WCB grew by over 86,000. Nearly 5 per cent more workers were covered last year, and the number of compensa- tion claims fell by more than 8 per cent.

More than 7,000 companies which participate in this program are proving the old saying: safety is good for business. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Habitat for Humanity Funding Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker. Members of this Assembly know that homelessness and a lack of affordable housing

April 29, 2009 Alberta Hansard 873 are challenges for all Canadian cities, and ours in Alberta are no exception. Individuals, many with families, who are hard-working but have low-income or entry-level jobs are having a difficult time finding a place to live. On April 24 I was pleased to join our Premier and our Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs to announce the largest partnership in Canada between a province and Habitat for Humanity, an organization which has made home ownership possible for many hard-working Albertans.

Through the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs Habitat for Humanity Alberta will receive $6 million to help build 67 homes in several communities across the province, including Brooks, Camrose, Calgary, Edmonton, Lethbridge, Olds, and Red Deer. All of the homes are built by volunteers, donors, and the actual recipi- ents themselves. The 67 new hom es will be sold to low-income families at 80 per cent of market value. Habitat for Humanity holds the mortgage, charges no interest, and amortizes the mortgage for as many years as necessary to ensure the families pay only 30 per cent of their income.

The program also requires a contribution of 500 hours of work by the homeowner recipient and his family. Mr. Speaker, this unique partnership reminds us all that we need to continue to work together as one community to ensure Albertans have a safe and sustainable place to call home. In just two years this government has increased access to safe and affordable housing by developing more than 5,600 new units, and we are on our way to achieving our goal of 11,000 units by 2012. In doing so, we will build a stronger Alberta, a place where our communities are modern, diverse, and dynamic. Thank you very much.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Mackay. Welcoming and Inclusive Communities Ms Woo-Paw: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to speak on welcoming communities. Canada as a country of immigrants is well aware that the character of a city or community can be considerably shaped by migration. Migration not only alters the size of the city but also the cultural expression of the collective over time. Recent Alberta-based consultations and reports are telling us that many of our communities know they need to do something to respond to the changes, but they don’t know what to do.

Then we have research informing us that a community tends to enjoy a smoother transition if its institutions and citizens understand how diversity influences and benefits communities, if communities are prepared for the diversity they face, and that integration is a two-way street, that it is both for newcomers as well as established communities. Mr. Speaker, our government’s goal on developing strong and inclusive communities sets a context for continued development in creating welcoming communities in Alberta.

In 2005-06 with a grant from the human rights, citizenship, and multiculturalism education fund the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association produced the welcoming and inclusive communities toolkit, an online resource for municipalities interested in becoming more welcoming and inclusive and in combating racism and discrimina- tion. In Alberta the municipalities of Wood Buffalo, Drayton Valley, Calgary, Edmonton, Brooks, Grande Prairie, Lethbridge, and St. Albert joined the UNESCO Coalition of Municipalities Against Racism and Discrimination.

Their request for support in building welcoming communities led to a three-year welcoming and inclusive communities (WIC) partnership between the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission, the human rights and citizenship branch, and AUMA. This partnership will increase the capacity of municipalities to build welcoming communities and provide greater networking opportunities to the CMARD members. Sensitive and proactive management on the effects of immigration and diversity would help cities prosper through the process of change.

Thank you. head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Hospital Capacity Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’ve heard complaints from both patients and doctors that Alberta’s health care facilities are seriously over capacity and can barely deal with the daily pressures, let alone any extra demand that may occur such as that with the influenza outbreak. Lack of capacity is revealed by beds in hallways and overcrowded rooms, that have become the new normal on a hospital visit today.

To the Premier: how far over capacity are Edmonton and Calgary’s major hospitals? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, the budget for health increased 4.7 per cent. Physicians received, over the next three years, a billion-dollar increase in their remuneration. We’re doing whatever we can to attract more nurses and other health care providers to the province of Alberta.

We’re doing a lot to offset, of course, the challenges to the system: more people moving to the province of Alberta, an aging population, more technology, and just more of what we’re doing in terms of hip and joint replacement, heart surgery, anything and everything that we can provide in Alberta. There’s more demand, and we’re meeting those demands. 1:50 Dr. Swann: Apparently the Premier doesn’t want to talk about overcapacity. Overcrowding ultimately increases the cost of health care because it creates a higher risk of infection, staff fatigue and burnout, medical mistakes, and patients staying longer.

Why is the Premier cutting health care when the real problem is in space and profession- als? We’re bursting at the seams, Mr. Premier. Mr. Stelmach: I have to reiterate: I don’t know where the opposi- tion sees it as a cut to health when it’s the only department to receive an increase of 4.7 per cent. I was reminded yesterday that other departments actually saw a reduction in their individual ministry budgets to make sure that we had enough money for the 4.7 per cent increase in health. We’re conti nuing to recruit nurses.

We’re continuing to train more nurses and more physicians here in the province of Alberta, Alberta born and bred students that have an opportunity now to get their medical degrees and nursing degrees right here in the province. Dr. Swann: Mr. Speaker, under current conditions of overcrowding in our system we cannot – we cannot – manage a major disaster. This is not a responsible or acceptable state of affairs in Alberta. Even opening new beds tomorrow, Mr. Premier, means weeks or months before we have staff to fill those. Will the Premier act immediately to open new beds in Edmonton and Calgary? Mr. Stelmach: Mr.

Speaker, we’re putting billions of dollars into infrastructure in health. It’s not only in acute-care research facilities

Alberta Hansard April 29, 2009874 but also in long-term care. You combine that with all of the additional training, the number of spaces that we increased in universities and colleges. Again, let’s not just focus on doctors and nurses. There are other allied health care providers. We’ve increased those numbers to provide and support the nurses and doctors that are delivering health care in this province. So we have done a lot for the future.

Just as a reminder to everyone, here in the province of Alberta, in the city of Calgary, the new Children’s hospital has one bed per child, also room for the parent, again, you know, for breaking the chain for disease prevention within the facility. There’s a very good example of the additional investment in infrastructure. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the most vulnerable times of their lives this government is denying basic human dignity to patients by putting them in hallways or overcrowded coed rooms.

If my loved one were lying in a hallway somewhere or embarrassed by being in a coed room, I would be livid with this government, just as many Albertans who are writing to me are. To the Premier. This government is mismanaging health care so badly that even in a province this wealthy we are cramming three or more patients into a two-bed room. When will you resolve this chaos, Mr. Premier? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, you know, back in 1958 – I don’t want to give away my age because people will really know how old I am – I was in a six-man ward.

I spent a month and a half in that facility recovering from a broken bone. Today the same facility is coed. There are men and there are women in the very same facility being treated just as well as I was many, many years ago as a young lad. The point I’m making is that the system is continually changing. It’s increasing the scope of service that we deliver to Albertans. The new technology is amazing. For the month and a half that I spent in the hospital, today I would have been in perhaps a couple of days, and I’d have been home convalescing and more than likely, perhaps, healed up better; I’m not quite sure.

But that’s how health has changed, and that’s what we have to keep in mind. We also have a very aging population. This is the glut generation, the baby boomer generation. They’ll be retiring in 10 years, putting on additional strain, and that’s why billions of dollars are being spent on health care facilities in Alberta. Dr. Swann: Well, I wonder how the Premier’s parents would feel about being in a coed room.

This government is failing Alberta’s health care professionals as well, working in unacceptable, crowded rooms crammed with more patients than they were designed for, increasing the risk of mistakes and litigation. How will we keep professionals in this province, Mr. Premier? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, once the leader starts talking about my parents – my parents were not any different than many parents in this room. When they were helping to build this province, there was no publicly funded health care. They were lucky to have a bed.

When they did go to the hospital, many had to sell a farm, or neighbours had to get together, put money together to keep someone in the hospital. Those were the true pioneer days of this province. This thing about a coed room: that’s the least of our issues. Our issue today is to make sure that this health care system is sustained for the next generation. That’s how we’ve got to start working together. Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government is failing all Albertans by putting them in hallways and cramming them into overcrowded rooms. What will the Premier do in the next 90 days to fix this problem?

Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, you know, someone that has come from the health care profession – and that’s the leader – unfortu- nately has very little knowledge of actually what’s happening in the province in terms of the number of beds that have been opened, the physicians that have been attracted to the province of Alberta. Just since April 1, 2004, and, again, rolling this out in an intensive, aggressive, capital plan, $2.6 billion dollars has been spent on health care facilities just in Calgary alone, just in one city.

That is more, I dare say, than some provinces have spent in the entire, whole province, and this is in one city. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. AIMCo Governance Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There is no question that the minister of finance should not be telling AIMCo, as an arm’s-length investment corporation, what specific investment decisions to make. But the minister absolutely should be telling AIMCo the rules under which it makes those decisions and making sure those rules, the codes of conduct, are enforced.

This is $75 billion worth of public money, and the public, in the person of the finance minister, should always know that decisions were made appropriately. To the minister: does the minister understand that the conduct and activities of AIMCo are her responsibility as the minister of finance? Ms Evans: Yes, absolutely, Mr. Speaker. We have also legislation that clearly articulates not only the role and relationship with the government of Alberta but the responsibility for the directors that serve on AIMCo. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think we made a tiny, tiny little bit of progress there. If this government has acted appropriately and taken all the necessary steps to avoid a potential or perceived conflict of interest in AIMCo’s investment in Precision Drilling, why won’t the minister just table AIMCo’s code of conduct documents and all other relevant documents and show us the proof? Ms Evans: You know, Mr.

Speaker, I know that the CEO, president and chief executive officer, Leo de Bever, contacted the hon. member opposite to make a comment relative to the challenges to, really, the code of ethics that exists between the board members and the kinds of decision-making they have. It is proper and right, I believe, for those kinds of questions to go initially to the chairman of the board, Mr. Charles Baillie, who will be pleased to answer them. We will arrange for that comment and response back. But the inference in this House about that lack of conduct, as implied by the member opposite, is totally inappropriate. Mr.

Taylor: Mr. Speaker, I am still waiting for that phone call that she referred to. I have not received that p hone call or that contact yet. Ms Evans: E-mail.

April 29, 2009 Alberta Hansard 875 Mr. Taylor: E-mail? Haven’t received it. Go back and check your sources, Minister. Since ATB, another arm’s-length Crown corporation, publicly displays its code of conduct, corporate statement of governance practices, and directors’ independent standards on its website, if ATB can do this, why isn’t the same expected of AIMCo, the manager of over $70 billion worth of public funds? And if it is expected, where is it? 2:00 Ms Evans: Mr.

Speaker, as of January 1, 2008, AIMCo was established with a board of directors that only very recently, last August, after a global search, was able to appoint president and CEO Leo de Bever. Over the last period of time his focus and energy has been committed to looking after the images, looking after the IT system and all those things the Auditor General identified. I will acknowledge that there may be more need for public communica- tion, but the primary focus of AIMCo should be to raise the maximum amount of dollars for Albertans with Albertans’ money.

We will get on to making our communication refined in a way that, hopefully, will meet the needs of Albertans. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands- Norwood. Parental Choice in Education Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday the Premier stated that the teaching of evolution will become optional in Alberta public schools if parents object on religious grounds. Eighty-three years after the Scopes monkey trial in Tennessee teaching evolution in public schools will again be prohibited for some children.

Why will the Premier allow some children to be denied a balanced, scientific, and objective education? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, that statement is totally wrong. He was at the news conference yesterday. That statement is totally wrong, and I ask him to withdraw it. If he wants to ask questions about the act that was put here before the Legislature, that’s fine, but don’t come here with the wrong information. Mr. Mason: Mr. Speaker, I heard the Premier confirm it, and so did reporters because it has been also contained in the coverage of his news conference yesterday.

I want to know how far this Premier is prepared to go in allowing parental choice based on religious views to affect what children are taught in public schools. Will Holocaust deniers be able to claim religious grounds to prevent their children from learning about the Holocaust? Will those who believe in the subordination of women be able to prevent their children from learning about the human . . . The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, this government supports a very, very fundamental right, and that is parental rights with respect to education. The proposed amendments are very clear.

These are amendments to the legislation th at was introduced in this House yesterday, and this is how – and I mentioned to the media that when you start talking about human rights, it’s very easy to crank up headlines because sometimes the media will try just to crank up the emotion either through fear or some other means. But emotion gets past the hard evidence of what’s before this House. Simply said, the amendments to the human rights legislation simply confirm rights that parents or guardians have already concerning the education of their children.

Parents or guardians would have the right to exempt their children from courses of study, programs, or materials that include subject matter dealing explicitly with religious instruction, sexuality, or sexual orientation. This is already in the manual that the Department of Education has. This is simply putting it into the act. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I hope to get the same consideration as the Premier. This government just spent $25 million of taxpayers’ money to give Alberta a new image.

All they’ve done is to make Alberta look like Northumberland and sound like Arkansas. Albertans are embarrassed by this government’s ineptitude. When will the Premier start projecting an image of Albertans that is as modern, progressive, and culturally sophisticated as Albertans actually are? Mr. Stelmach: Mr. Speaker, I’m glad he asked that question. Just look at this caucus. You find me another caucus in the country of Canada that is more diverse than right here in the Alberta Legisla- ture. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne. [interjections] The chair has recognized the hon.

Member for Whitecourt-Ste. Anne. He is inte rested in the concerns of the member. Nursing Education Mr. VanderBurg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, our health care budget takes a bout 40 per cent of our overall budget. As funding demands on government, so do the demands of the strong health care system. To support this system, we need to ensure that we are well prepared to meet these demands. My first question is to the Minister of Advanced Education and Technology. What is the cost share for educating our nurses between the student and the Alberta taxpayer? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr.

Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We in the government of Alberta look at the investment in Albertans’ futures as a sharing in that investment. This vocation, nursing, is almost a hundred per cent employable, so it’s a great investment for students to make. The cost to the government and taxpayers for a nursing education if you just looked at the operating costs alone is approximately $13,000 to $14,000 per year. The average, dependent upon the institution that you’re in, for students in the nursing field is roughly just under 40 per cent of what the total cost would be.

So taxpayers are investing about 60-plus, and the students are investing about 40. Mr. VanderBurg: To the same minister. I have students from Whitecourt-Ste. Anne attending the Grant MacEwan College, and they started a four-year nursing program. How will the number of nurses going through this program impact the targets that have been set for the growing Alberta workforce to meet the demands of our future? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Indeed, in this House we’ve

Alberta Hansard April 29, 2009876 made the commitment on several occasions to the Premier’s vision of where we’re going with graduating nurses, 2,000 nurses by 2012. That’s graduating nurses by 2012. The Grant MacEwan program is a critical and key component of that. We expect that they would be graduating upwards of 300 students per year – graduating those students per year – to reach that target, so they’re a very key component of that. We look forward to some laddering opportuni- ties as well within the system. Mr. VanderBurg: Mr. Speaker, my next question is to the Minister of Health and Wellness.

Can the minister tell us what nurse retraining initiatives the Health and Wellness ministry has under- taken to get more nurses working in this province? Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, that’s an excellent question because we have committed through the Alberta health workforce action plan some $45 million. Over the past two years we’ve had almost 400 former registered nurses participating in the refresher education program to become reregistered.

We’ve also made a number of investments to ensure that we have funding for interna- tionally trained nurses, and we’re working with our postsecondary institutions to do refresher courses for licensed practical nurses. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-McCall, followed by the hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar. Condominium Property Act Consultation Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government held a meeting last summer to discuss residential construction practices and condominium legislative changes, which did not include stake- holders from the condominium community.

These stakeholders need to be part of these discussi ons as they are the ones ultimately on the hook for the poor construction of their condos. To the Minister of Service Alberta: why did the government hold a meeting to discuss condominium changes without including the condo owners, board members, and property managers, who would be most impacted by these changes? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With respect to the meeting the hon. member is referring to, I’d like to assure the hon. member that any time that Service Alberta is looking at a particular act, especially the Condominium Property Act, we are very inclusive and we consult with a number of different people. As I indicated in the House last week, we have been looking at that property act for some time, and we are going to be moving forward on a further consultation on this very complex piece of legislation. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So far we don’t know who the minister has been consulting.

To the minister again: who has the minister been consulting regard ing legislative changes for the condominium community or the study involving residential construction practices? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, with respect to any piece of legislation the approach of Service Alberta is to be inclusive and respectful and to bring everyone to the table. Again, there are a number of issues that have been on the table with Service Alberta, whether it’s payday loan regulation or whether it’s this act.

I am looking forward to further consultation on this and bringing forward more individuals. If there’s a particular group that we should engage with, I’d be more than happy to meet with that group. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the minister again: what specific policy changes to protect condominium stakeholders are being considered by the minister? 2:10 Mrs. Klimchuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, we know that the Condomin- ium Property Act has been around for some time. We know the economy has changed. We know that there are situations with mediation.

There are situations with property management compa- nies, situations with the amount of fees that are in the condo associations. There are a whole number of issues on the table, so we should be looking at the whole br eadth and depth of all of those issues to make sure that the legislation is updated and inclusive of what’s happening in today’s world. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar, followed by the hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Crime Reduction and Prevention Strategy Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m happy to say that much work has been done for the benefit of Albertans of helping build safe and secure communities. As hon. members know, in response to recommendation 31 from the keeping communities safe strategy the Safe Communities Secretariat was established to oversee the implementation of the task force recommendations on crime prevention. My first question is to the hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Can the minister tell us what action is being taken to establish a comprehensive, long-term crime reduction and prevention strategy? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Redford: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. It’s very good news that we have a Safe Communities Secretariat. That was started a year ago. It’s housed within my ministry. The important pi ece of that secretariat is that it’s beginning to build that long-term plan. I think there are two components that are very important to that plan. The first is that communities need to be engaged. There’s a lot of work that communities are doing right now with respect to building safe and strong communities that we need to listen to and we need to support.

The second piece that is very important is bringing together the eight government departments that we think have a particular role in safe communities. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister. I recently, along with my hon. colleague from Wetaskiwin-Camrose, attended a community consultation at the Ermineskin Elders Centre in my constituency with respect to the government’s gang suppres- sion initiative in Hobbema. Can the minister tell me how this particular initiative fits into the province’s long-term crime preven- tion and reduction strategy?

The Speaker: The hon. minister.

April 29, 2009 Alberta Hansard 877 Ms Redford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is an important part of the work that the government is doing at the moment. Out of the 31 recommendations that the task force made last year, eight of them have something to do with education, awareness, prevention, or enforcement around gangs.

So we’re using this opportunity of the antigang summit that’s coming forward in June, that the Premier will be chairing, where we will build a comprehensive gang prevention strategy to demonstrate how to work with communities and work with government departments on an integrated approach to an overall strategy. A part of that is the consultations that have been taking place across the province in eight different communities. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Finally, to the same minister: how will we use what we have learned in these consulta- tions in developing both a gang suppression initiative and a longer term strategy? Ms Redford: Well, Mr. Speaker, one of the things that we know about the work that we’re doing around safe communities and building strong communities is that there are a number of pieces of work that are already happening. But what we need to do is to bring that work together in a way where we’re able to benefit from one experience in one part of the province and learn from that to build on another program in another part of the province.

The other piece is that it gives us the opportunity to develop new policy approaches and deliver new programs that will support the community in the work that they think needs to be done to build safer communities. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East, followed by the hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose. Homelessness Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Albertans continue to be concerned about homelessness as now some are afraid of being homeless because of having lost their job. They’re turning up in our offices and on our website www. budget2009.ca.

These ordinary people are worried about the recent transfer of homeless and eviction prevention funding to the programs that are beyond capacity and have waiting lists of 3,000 people. To the Minister of Employment and Immigration: Jason from Calgary would like the minister to explain why he has not been able to access any employment training through income support for over two years. Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, at any one time and in any society and in any economy we find that there are people who struggle to make ends meet. In Alberta we do have some very good programs to help individuals.

Those programs are important both in good times and in tougher times. We deal with individuals on a priority basis. We do have emergency assistance that’s available on a very, very short- term notice. But in the long run we work with all individuals that are affected. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Pastoor: Thank you. David from Calgary has two questions for the Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs. Does the minister have a distinct off-reserve aboriginal housing plan that is consistent with the province’s 10-year plan to end homelessness, and if not, why not? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs.

Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the hon. member doesn’t mind, I’d just like to go back to the first question. I want to assure you that Jason is being well looked after, hon. member, because he is a constituent of mine. We’ve met with him often. I know exactly the situation. We are working very closely with Jason. An off-reserve housing plan that’s specifically for aboriginal people. The plan that we have for permanent housing for the homeless is for all people that are homeless, and that would include aboriginal people. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Jason will be delighted that we are discussing this in the House. To the same minister: will the funding allocation for off-reserve aboriginal housing be proportional to the high percentage of urban homeless aboriginal people? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mrs. Fritz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The housing program for people that are homeless will be based on, as I said, what is available for all people. The criteria are exactly the same for off-reserve aboriginal people as it is for all Albertans. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity.

First Nations Consultation Mr. Olson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In 2005 the government adopted a First Nations consultation policy, and the intent was that there would be consultation with First Nations people with regard to projects that might adversely affect their treaty rights. Part of that policy was also that it would be reviewed every four years. My questions are for the Minister of Aboriginal Relations. I now have constituents asking me: since the four years are up, is the review going ahead, and what are the particulars of the review? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The member is quite right. We did bring in that policy. We were the first province, in fact, to have a First Nations po licy and consultation guidelines, developed back in 2005. We will be doing that review this year as part of our larger consultation initiative. We will be doing that review with the greatest of respect for so-called treaty rights and with as much involvement as possible with First Nations right from the beginning. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Olson: Thank you. Again for the minister.

Just relating to his last comment there, sometimes there can be a little bit of angst when somebody says that they’re going to be consulted with. I’m just wondering if the minister can provide some particulars as to how they will be meaningfully consulted with. Mr. Zwozdesky: Well, Mr. Speaker, we’re very committed to honouring our relationships with First Nations on a government-to- government basis. That’s exactly the way it’s reflected in our historic protocol agreement which our Premier signed with the grand chiefs and deputy grand chiefs and myself last year. We already

Alberta Hansard April 29, 2009878 have regularly scheduled meetings – that’s another very important thing – with consultations with ministers, MLAs, and others. We are also very involved with them in other capacities, through which I ask them how they want to be consulted. I’m asking them to be part of the design process this time, and that will give us the most meaning- ful consultation, I think, that they have ever had. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Olson: Thank you. Again for the minister.

No doubt the process will require some resources, and I’m told that the capacity to do that kind of a review could be an issue for some First Nations. I’m wondering if there is any funding available, then, for just the process. Mr. Zwozdesky: Mr. Speaker, that’s a very critical part of what we’re trying to do as a recently established self-standing ministry: develop the specific relationships that will help move that particular issue forward. For example, we provide about $6.6 million annually to First Nations. Some of that is obviously centred right around the consultation process.

With respect to this particular review, as we go down the path together with First Nations, as they provide feedback as to how they want to be involved and have input in the design, that might require us to take a look at other sources to augment the funding that they are already receiving. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Campsite Reservations Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

While the $10 online registration fee will provide piece of mind for those who can afford to secure a spot in any of the 25 campgrounds where two-thirds of the sites are restricted to reservation only, for others it will be viewed as an exclusionary practice whose aim is to generate revenue rather than promote a natural recreation experience. To the Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation: what mechanisms are in place to prevent an individual with an extra hundred dollars burning a hole in his wallet from turning a public ly subsidized campsite into a season-long exclusive weekend retreat? 2:20 Mrs.

Ady: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’d like to thank the hon. member for talking about the new reservation system that’s going to light up on Friday. It’s something that Albertans have been asking for for a long time. I’m happy and pleased to say that we’re ready with 25 campgrounds. I went online just a little while ago to demonstrate that site, and for the May long weekend it would cost me $88, including the $10 fee, to be able to go and use a very nice campsite in this province.

These campsites have to be serviced – garbage has to be hauled out; they have to be cleaned and kept – so I don’t think that that’s too large an amount of money. I do think that Albertans see our campsites as a good value. Mr. Chase: As a former campground operator in K Country I had a number of individuals question the rates, and now we’ve increased the rates by another $10, so it is a concern to campers, particularly during this recessionary period.

Are there any public safeguards to prevent an individual from monopolizing or booking more than one site each weekend, thereby furthe r eliminating the availability of spaces? Mrs. Ady: Well, Mr. Speaker, in all honesty, if the hon. member was to have called a campground in the past to book a site, it would have cost him $10 to book that site, so it’s not any different. That being said, I think that we will be looking at the reservation system.

The beauty of an online system is that you can actually see where people are booking and how they’re booking so that you can determine how to prevent those kinds of issues in the future. You can book four sites at a time. Then you’ve got to go off the system and go back on. We think it’s a very rational way to go about it and that it will serve the majority of Albertans very well. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Thank you. I very much want it to serve Albertans very well. It’s these unintended consequences that I am concerned about.

Has the minister taken into consideration that by making at least a somewhat supervised park camping experience more expensive, more families may be driven to random camping, where safety and security cannot be guaranteed? Mrs. Ady: Well, Mr. Speaker, I would say to the hon. member that we have not really made it more expensive. We are really offering much the same service as before. It is just now online, with better opportunity, I think, for fairness.

We’re always concerned about the random camping, and we are looking at opportunities that will create maybe a bit more of a rougher type of camping that’s more afford- able in the future for those that do like the random, but those are decisions we’ll make in the future. This is about a state-of-the-art system that helps Albertans that are trying to book their campsites this summer. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Bow. Career Development and Academic Upgrading Ms Notley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Recently we learned that the number of Albertans on EI increased by more than 6,500 people in February, the highest increase in the country. Meanwhile, this government’s plan for career development service and academic upgrading includes a 7 per cent cut in support for out-of-work Albertans trying to find the jobs they need. To the Minister of Employment and Immigration: how can he possibly expect to provide the growing number of out-of-work Albertans the upgrading and career development support they need when he’s actually cutting back on those services? Mr. Goudreau: Mr.

Speaker, our priority has been and always will be to connect people with jobs and help them get the training and upgrade the skills that they requi re so they can succeed in the workforce. Our whole role is to assess those particular individuals, and if we sense that there’s a need and if there’s a desire for them to receive the upgrading, we do have the budgets to have that happen. Ms Notley: Well, that’s great in theory, Mr. Speaker, but there’s been nearly an 80 per cent increase in the number of Albertans on EI.

Those benefits will last till February at the very latest, and only 1 in 3 unemployed Albertans even qualifies for EI benefits. Albertans needed a jobs budget, and the government gave them a welfare budget. To the minister: why is the minister abandoning the newly unemployed Albertans who need retraining help to support their families through this recession?

April 29, 2009 Alberta Hansard 879 Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, we need to put things in perspective. When our unemployment levels are low, any type of increase will trigger a high percentage. We still have a lot of people, over 2 million, in Alberta that are presently working. There’s no doubt that there are people that have lost their jobs. We’re very, very sympa- thetic to them, and we will continue to work with them to see if we can find them additional jobs or the training that they require to meet their job requirements or additional job requirements. Ms Notley: Well, Mr.

Speaker, it’s true that people have lost their jobs. Indeed, over 40,000 Albertans have lost their jobs so far this year, and no one thinks it will stop there. The number of Albertans on income support grows every month, and we know from the EI numbers that this trend will c ontinue, yet this government is planning to provide less re-employment help to each Albertan who needs it. To the minister: just how out of touch can the minister be if he plans to give unemployed Albertans less help at exactly the time they need more help? Mr. Goudreau: Mr.

Speaker, we went through our budget estimates about 10 days ago, and I think I indicated to the hon. member at that particular time that our budgets have in fact increased. They have not decreased from previous years. We are putting more emphasis on training and supports. We’re also finalizing agreements with our federal government to provide additional funding to those individu- als that are impacted by the economic downturn. We will continue to work with them. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Bow, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo.

Film Development Program Ms DeLong: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The film and television industry brings big dollars into this province. It grows our cultural identity and brings more tourists to Alberta. But a recent cancellation of a television series shot in Calgary is the latest indication of a decline in film and television production in Alberta. My questions are for the Minister of Culture and Community Spirit. As the minister responsible for this industry, what are you doing to address this decline? Mr. Blackett: Well, Mr.

Speaker, it is true that CBC has cancelled Wild Roses production, as much as we would have loved to have it. They cancelled due to a ratings decline. As most people know, there’s an economic downturn not just in Canada but across North America, and that has resulted in a downturn or a decline in the number of productions in film and television in the province and in the country. Last year the Alberta film development program guidelines were adjusted to try to help encourage more productions. We raised our cap from $1.5 million to $3 million so we could attract major motion pictures and full-feature series.

We also increased the amount they were able to use in terms of their financing for the package with their broadcast partner. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms DeLong: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My next question is to the same minister. Last year this minister committed to a new funding model for the film and television industry. What progress has been made? Or has this whole funding model been shelved? Mr. Blackett: Well, actually, Mr. Speaker, we were looking at a funding model and we were looking at a tax credit system similar to everybody else in North America.

But something has happened with this economic downturn. If you look at the situation that television, especially, finds itself in, right now the tax credit model is based on the fact that a province or state would give money to a producer who had a broadcast licence with a broadcaster. Well, the broadcasters are disappearing. The broadcasters are less able to fund their own productions. They’re spending less money on Canadian productions and more on U.S. productions. So we’re looking at a system that we think will be better for Alberta, not me too with everybody else.

Right now the investors get their film development money two months after production instead of waiting up to 18 months. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms DeLong: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last question to the same minister: all that being said, in these tough economic times can Alberta really afford a film development program, or can it afford not to have a film development program? Mr. Blackett: Well, Mr. Speaker, we can’t afford not to. We need a strong film and television production business to ensure that we have somebody telling our stories, somebody employing our crews, somebody filming in our great vistas.

We need to have the $102 million that the sector provides to our economy, especially in these tough economic times. Our film and television industry is knowl- edge based, it’s green, and it supports rural economic development, promotes tourism, and helps bring diversity to our economy, as I mentioned. Lead Times for Trials Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, the Department of Justice has added Crown prosecutors to streamline the operation of the courts. However, increased resources may not have resulted in decreased trial times. During main estimates the minister indicated that trial times have increased slightly since 2007.

This seems to indicate that the median time has increased from the previous total of 109 days. To the minister: can she confirm how long the median time is now in the province of Alberta? The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. 2:30 Ms Redford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We appointed new Crown prosecutors for a number of reasons. One of them was to streamline the system. Another was to deal with the fact that we had an increasing number of people coming into the court system. There’s no doubt that one of the reasons we did that is in order to deal with lead times and mean times.

I believe that in estimates, if I recall my conversation, and it was part of an answer I gave previously in this House –

whereas we have seen an increase in some lead times, we have not seen an increase in all lead times. There are specific charges where there have been slightly increased times, perhaps two or three days, but we’ve also seen reductions in cities and, in particular, courts. Mr. Hehr: To understand the nature of my questions, if you could try and confirm in writing, that would be great. Mr. Speaker, to the same minister: if the median time has surpassed the 109-day mark listed on page 208 of the 2009 ministry plan, what is the average number of days a litigant can expect between the first appearance in court and the conclusion of their matter now in the province of Alberta?

Alberta Hansard April 29, 2009880 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Redford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think that if we look at average mean times, we have to look at the applications that are coming forward. It depends on what court you’re in, it depends what the matter is, and it depends whether you’re in family court, youth court, or criminal court. Mr. Hehr: Well, I understand that. Nevertheless, a study came out last year that said that we weren’t doing very well in those measures. I assume you’re familiar with that study.

What I’m wondering is: are we past the 122-day national average as proposed in that study? If we are, what are we doing to combat that? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Redford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In fact, that study that came out just about this time last year said that we had made progress in some courts and not in others, that we were in the middle of the road with respect to the country. That was before we took some steps. We’re still finding those experiences. We are seeing some progress. We are seeing cases that aren’t even going into the court system.

I can’t give you a number with respect to an average mean time because I think the way that we’re approaching the situation is different than the way it’s being tested. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathcona, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Oil Sands Emissions Mr. Quest: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There’s been a lot of discus- sion on both sides of the border about oil sands and, specifically, carbon emissions from oil sands development. Last week there was some discussion in the Golden State as California debated and passed a low-carbon fuel standard.

I understand Alberta officials were in attendance at the hearing. To the Minister of Energy: can he explain to the members of this Assembly why Alberta was at this hearing? Mr. Knight: Well, most certainly I can, Mr. Speaker. The situation is that when it comes to oil sands and the development of oil sands and production of bitumen feedstock into the American market, what we want, quite simply, is not special treatment; we just want equal treatment. That’s why we’re at these meetings.

We think it’s a bit unfortunate, the result in California, given that the carbon intensity of oil sands production is equal to oil that is actually produced in places like California, Venezuela, or, for that matter, in Mexico. California’s heavy oil is very carbon intensive, and it’s actually produced in a similar way that in situ oil sands are produced in Alberta. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Quest: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the Minister of Energy: could the minister explain to the Assembly what the implications of the California low-carbon fuel standard might be for Alberta’s energy exports? Mr.

Knight: Well, Mr. Speaker, we wouldn’t expect that there’d be any immediate impact because we don’t actually ship directly into the California market. However, we are looking at expanding markets for our products out of Alberta, and all we’re asking for, again, as I said, is a level playing field for Alberta oil. California’s situation shows that there is a need to continue our work with U.S. officials, number one, to protect Albertans’ jobs and our economy and, secondly, to highlight our commitment to responsible energy development in the province. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Quest: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are some suggestions by environmental groups that the Alberta and Canadian governments are seeking special treatment for oil sands emissions. To the Minister of Environment: can he please advise how Alberta’s oil sands are treated under the Alberta climate change plans and what we’re seeking when it comes to federal or North American climate change plans? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Renner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can unequivocally confirm that Alberta and Canada are not looking for special treatment. In fact, as you know, there is no free pass for oil sands in Alberta’s legislation.

Oil sands emitters are treated exactly the same as any other large industrial emitter. We’re asking for that same equal treatment in any kind of North American climate change strategy that’s put in place. Our primary concern is that at the end of the day any kind of North American strategy results in a reduction in emissions where they are produced. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, followed by the hon. Member for Athabasca-Redwater. Temporary Foreign Workers Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last May the Minister of Employment and Immigration said that he was unaware of any incidents of unpaid workers going back further than six months. However, on Monday the hon. minister admitted that over $3 million was owed to 132 Chinese temporary foreign workers working in Fort McMurray from April through to July of 2007. My first question is to the Minister of Employment and Immigration. Given that wages were unpaid two years ago, why did the minister not do anything about it until now? Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, we weren’t aware until just very, very recently that these wages had not been paid.

These discoveries occurred after the investigations following the deaths of the two Chinese workers. It was during that particular investigation when we found out that the wages had not been fully paid. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the same minister: given that the minister said also on Monday that the funds are being held in a government trust account, how did the minister get the 3 million dollars plus that was cheated from those workers in Fort McMurray back from the labour broker in Hong Kong? Mr. Goudreau: Mr.

Speaker, I believe there are two different situations. One is that there are some wages that were owing prior to them departing, and then as part of their contract there were some wages that were transferred over. We’re dealing with the 3 million

April 29, 2009 Alberta Hansard 881 dollars plus that are held in a government trust account. Those will be disbursed directly to the workers who had not been paid for their work prior to their return to China. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the same minister: where did the Minister of Employment and Immigration collect the $3 million that was cheated from the temporary foreign workers in Fort McMurray? Where did he collect that money from? Mr. Goudreau: Mr. Speaker, I believe those were collected from the various contractors that were involved on the job site.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Athabasca-Redwater, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Municipal Capital Financing Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Alberta Capital Finance Authority Act allows certain nonprofit groups such as municipalities to access capital at reasonable rates through the Alberta Capital Finance Authority. Other groups such as founda- tions which build and run seniors’ lodges cannot. My first question is to the Minister of Finance and Enterprise.

My constituents would like to know why municipalities have access to this low-cost capital while other nonprofit groups such as the Greater North Foundation, which runs seniors’ lodges across northern Alberta, do not. The Speaker: The hon. minister. Ms Evans: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Our practice has been to confine the access to these f unds to those people that have either been elected or appointed to do jobs that the government needs and deems to be important and have been given a legislative mandate. If you look at a municipality, they have received funds through the ACFA, and that’s their prerogative.

The attitude of our government has been to channel people who want to have access to those kinds of funds for particular projects to go and seek approval at the municipal table first before moving further. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Since municipalities have a debt-load cap, some feel that they should not have to borrow on behalf of these nonprofit groups. In addition, a foundation may have to get sign-off from a dozen municipalities, especially when you include summer villages, just to apply for a grant for access to capital.

To the same minister: will the minister allow these nonprofit groups to go directly to the authority for capital? Ms Evans: Mr. Speaker, when we reviewed this practice last year, we determined that it was not wise to do so. Those were times of a different nature than we have today. Subsequent to that and in more recent weeks because of the concerns that have been raised by the hon. members and others in this Legislative Assembly, we will review this practice to see if it would be prudent to change our policy. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My final question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs: can the Minister of Municipal Affairs tell us whether there are opportunities for nonprofit groups like seniors’ lodges to access funding through the municipal sustain- ability initiative? The Speaker: The hon. minister. 2:40 Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This government is committed to building strong communities. Recent updates to the MSI guidelines have made it easier for municipalities to invest in nonprofit organizations.

Capital and operating support is available and eligible under MSI if it’s operated by a municipality or if it’s operated by a nonprofit organization. Municipalities have the autonomy and the ability to make decisions on what they believe is important in their own communities. MSI has made a positive impact in our communities and will continue to do so. The Speaker: Hon. members, that was 96 questions and responses today. In a few seconds from now we’ll continue with the routine. head: Members’ Statements (continued) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Support for Public Education Mr.

Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Alberta’s public education deficit. The Alberta government’s support for public education is inadequate from kindergarten through to postgraduate studies. StatsCan figures confirm that 40 per cent of Albertans are function- ally illiterate. Alberta has the highest dropout rate in Canada. Depending on how you define dropout or failure to complete high school within a consecutive five-year period, the number of students who fail to graduate ranges from one-third to one-quarter.

An even more dramatic dropout reality occurs in English as a second language, where 75 per cent of students fail to complete high school within five years. Considering that every dollar invested in educa- tion yields a $3 return, academic failure undermines our economic viability. Another lost opportunity Alberta statistic is the fact that year after year one-quarter of eligible high school graduates who achieved the grades necessary and can afford our inflated postsecondary tuition rates are turned away due to lack of postsecondary seats in Alberta.

A key component of a successful education system is building upon a strong foundation. B ecause the government has failed to imple- ment the recommendations of the Learning Commission, local school boards have been left scrambling to find the resources to fund full-day kindergarten for the most socioeconomically vulnerable or language-deficient children, never mind considering trying to find the money necessary to fund half-day junior kindergarten. The province still has a long way to go before achieving the 1 to 17 K to 3 pupil-teacher ratio six years after the reduction recommendation was accepted.

A strongly supported education system will be a key factor in eliminating the poverty under which 78, 000 Alberta children were living prior to the recession’s fu ll force being felt. Our most important resource, the key to Alberta’s survival, never mind success, is our youth. Education must be viewed as an investment rather than as an expense. The Speaker: Is there an additional government speaker in Mem- bers’ Statements today? Okay.

Alberta Hansard April 29, 2009882 head: Introduction of Bills The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Bill 34 Drug Program Act Mr. Liepert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today and request leave to introduce first reading of Bill 34, the Drug Program Act. This being a money bill, His Honour the Honourable Lieutenant Governor, having been informed of the contents of this bill, recommends the same to the Assembly.

This legislation puts in place a framework to guide pharmaceutical policies for the future. [Motion carried; Bill 34 read a first time] head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last Friday, April 24, at Dr. E.W. Coffin elementary school in Calgary-Varsity I had the honour and pleasure of participating in the celebration of the SEEDS water conservation challenge.

The students, staff, and supportive parents of this amazing school together with the corporate sponsorship of Devon Canada and Canada Safeway have dedicated themselves to preserving our environment. Previously they transformed a portion of their schoolyard into a creatively designed and illustratively signed nature preserve. The Speaker: Hon. members, the chair is pleased to table five copies of the School at the Legislature report card for 2007-2008.

This is a Legislative Assembly educational program for grade 6 students cosponsored with community partners Priority Printing, Access Media Group, CKUA Radio Network along with Via Rail Canada and the downtown Edmonton Rotary Club. head: Tablings to the Clerk The Clerk: I wish to advise the House that the following document was deposited with the office of the Clerk: on behalf of the hon. Ms Evans, Minister of Finance and Enterprise, pursuant to the Insurance Act the Alberta Automobile Insurance Rate Board 2008 annual report.

The Speaker: Hon. members, before calling Orders of the Day, let us all congratulate the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta, who has arrived at another momentous occasion in his time frame. It was a number of years ago that he entered the world. head: Orders of the Day head: Government Bills and Orders Second Reading Bill 36 Alberta Land Stewardship Act Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, I’m pleased to bring Bill 36, the Alberta Land Stewardship Act, before the Assembly for second reading today. Alberta’s new land-use framework was adopted this past Decem- ber.

This framework had three goals: a robust economy, healthy ecosystems, and people-friendly communities. The Alberta Land Stewardship Act creates the legal authority to turn these goals into realities. Over the past generation Albertans have experienced unprece- dented growth. Our population has more than doubled, and economic activity has increased at an even faster rate. We all know that Albertans have benefited greatly from this growth, but this same growth has crowded many of our landscapes and in some areas tested the health of our air, land, water, and wildlife.

In some areas of the eastern slopes, for example, on the same parcel of land it’s not uncommon to find a cattle grazing lease, an active forestry disposi- tion, a gas well, recreational hikers and anglers, bears and deer, and, of course, the critical headwaters for the streams and rivers that water southern Alberta. When it gets this crowded, we all lose. What worked when we were only 1 million Albertans is working less well at 3 and a half million and w ill not work at 5 million or 10 million. So it comes down to this, Mr. Speaker.

If we want to keep what we have here in Alberta – and we have a lot – we have to change how we do it, and that’s what the Alberta Land Stewardship Act does. Regional planning is the cornerstone of the Land Stewardship Act. The act establishes seven planning regions, identifies the contents of the regional plans, outlines the planning process, and sets out the roles of the regional advisory councils and the secretariat.

The seven regions are congruent with Alberta’s major watersheds, a policy breakthrough that will facilitate the co-ordination of our land and water policies, and the act makes these regional plans binding on the provincial government, local governments, and all boards and commissions. The act also creates four new stewardship policy tools. Voluntary conservation easements, already a growing presence on our land- scapes, are further encouraged and expanded to include agricultural lands. Conservation offsets will help to protect land for conservation purposes and to compensate for industrial development.

The transfer of development credits will rein in urban sprawl and prevent the fracturing of agricultural land and protect landscapes and habitat. Conservation directives will help protect valued landscapes and viewscapes on private and public lands. Where a directive is applied to private land, if there is a re sulting loss of value, it provides for landowner compensation, a Canadian first in respecting property rights. The Alberta Land Stewardship Act includes consequential amendments to more than 25 other acts. Most of these amendments are simply to ensure compliance with regional plans.

Two of the amended acts are under my ministry. Amendments under the Public Lands Act will allow us to better manage access to public land and support conservation and recreation on those lands. Both the Public Lands Act and the Forests Act will have updated offence provisions, with higher fines and creative sentencing and the authority to establish a dispute resolution and appeal process. Also, the Forests Act will reference regional plans and clarify decisions and activities related to timber dispositions.

Finally, the ability to create forest land-use zones, or FLUZ, is moved from the Forests Act to the Public Lands Act to facilitate the better management of crowded landscapes. 2:50 Mr. Speaker, work has already started on planning for the lower Athabasca region. Its regional advisory council is in place, and the advisory council for the South Saskatchewan will be announced in May. Timelines call for the regional plans for both of these regions to be completed in 2010. We need the legislative authority to ensure this work gets done in a timely manner.

Bill 36, the Alberta Land Stewardship Act, provides that authority. I would ask that second reading be adjourned. Thank you. [Motion to adjourn debate carried]

April 29, 2009 Alberta Hansard 883 Bill 43 Marketing of Agricultural Products Amendment Act, 2009 (No. 2) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Battle River-Wainwright. Mr. Griffiths: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to rise today and move second reading of Bill 43, the Marketing of Agricultural Products Amendment Act, 2009 (No. 2). The proposed amendments to the legislation will give producers of four commodity groups the same choice as other producers, a choice which they do not currently have. It will make our legislation consistent.

It will help ensure acc ountability, it will help ensure leadership, and it will help ensure responsiveness of the commis- sions. Under the Marketing of Agricultural Products Act, or MAPA for short, agricultural producers are able to form boards and commissions. Twenty producer boards and commissions currently operate under MAPA, including seven supply-managed marketing boards, which Bill 43 does not impact or change in any way. The remaining are commissions that collect mandatory per-head, per-acre, or per-pound levies, commonly called check-offs, for producers.

Producers belonging to nine commodity groups have the option of requesting a refund. However, producers in the remaining four commodity groups are legally obliged to pay the check-off but have no means to ask for a refund. Bill 43 would change that and give beef, pork, sheep, and potato producers that fundamental right of choice. These producers would now have the ability to request a refund from their respective organizations, particularly if they are not satisfied with their association. Very simply, Mr.

Speaker, what is being proposed is to give these producers the right and the ability to choose, to have a voice if they do not feel the organization has delivered value or met their needs. It is important to note that the nine commissions with refundable check-offs all operate successfully and are thriving organizations that still have the financial means to support their members’ needs. Yes, Mr. Speaker, some producers will request refunds when this change is made, but not every producer will. On average in the other nine commissions only about 7 to 10 per cent of the producers request refunds.

Making the check-offs refundable for the remaining four commissions will encourage the commissions to remain relevant by being responsive to their members’ needs and help ensure accountability. Producers who feel that their needs have been represented will see value in t hose commissions and likely won’t request a refund. Perhaps for some of the commissions it will help them regain an active and engaged membership.

Beef, pork, sheep, and potato producers, like the rest of the producers paying check-offs in Alberta, should be able to decide if a commission is representing their needs, if they’re getting value for their hard-earned dollars that laws are requiring them to pay for their respective commissions. If the answer is no to either of those two questions, those producers should not be forced under law to continue to provide financial support to a commission that they don’t feel represents them.

I know we’ll hear from some vocal individuals that will say that making these four check-offs refundable will destroy the associa- tions, Mr. Speaker, but this is not about the industry associations. This is about the future viability of the industry itself and the future success of all of Alberta’s producers, whether they’re big or small and regardless of the commodity that they produce. Keeping the status quo and allowing commissions to be compl acent will not allow for a profitable future for our producers and will not drive the industry ahead.

This is about allowing new leadership and realistic market-based strategies to re-energize the industry. It’s also about fairness. It’s about choice. It’s about a successful future. As a Conservative government our law should not dictate what Albertans do with their money, what group they have to pay dues to, and whom they have to support with their own funds. It’s also important that our legislation is consistent, and Bill 43 is just the way to accomplish this. If passed, this change would not go into effect until each commission’s 2010-2011 fiscal year.

This time frame gives the commissions adequate time to make the necessary adjustments internally and to secure their members’ willing support rather than legislated support for their organization. The Agricul- tural Products Marketing Council will continue to work closely with each commission and support them through the transition. I look forward to the debate and receiving the support of members for this bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With that, I would like to move that we adjourn debate. [Motion to adjourn debate carried] Bill 44 Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Amendment Act, 2009 The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Culture and Community Spirit. Mr. Blackett: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Bill 44, the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Amendment Act, 2009, is the first update to our human rights legislation in almost 13 years. It is a key component of my department’s review of Alberta’s human rights system, with the goal of reducing discrimination in Alberta.

We’ll do this by focusing on three key areas of improvement: efficiency, effectiveness, and transparency. We also want to make sure that the commission has the capacity it needs to effectively serve all Albertans. Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to ensuring all Albertans have equal opportunity to participate in the life of Alberta and to maximize their individual potential. Alberta’s population is growing in size and diversity. We need to ensure that the act and the commission continue to meet the priorities and needs of a changing population in the most efficient and effective manner possible.

The bill strives to meet this challenge with a number of administrative changes to the commission to reduce the time it takes to process and review a complaint. For example, the commission receives more than 30,000 inquiries per year. In 2008-09 they r eceived 1,245 potential complaints in writing. All of these written complaints need to be carefully reviewed by commission staff. In addition, the amendments will clarify the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission’s role by removing “citizen- ship” from both its name and guiding legislation.

The process for handling appeals as they arise will also be improved by ensuring that they are directed to members of a tribunal. This improved process will also increase transparency and will also make amendments that are consistent with current legislation and judicial decisions such as writing in sexual orientation. The rights of parents on the education of their child would also be confirmed. That is why it’s important to support Bill 44, the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multicultural- ism Amendment Act, 2009. Mr.

Speaker, Alberta already has strong human rights legislation, and these changes are simply designed to fine-tune, update, and make it more effective and efficient. The legislation has not been revised, as I mentioned before, for over 13 years now. Although we’ve made some important changes to the commission already, including hiring a new chief commissioner, more needs to be done. I’m working closely with our new chief commissioner, the hon. Blair

Alberta Hansard April 29, 2009884 Mason, to implement some practices that will help speed up the process and improve the transparency. As part of Budget 2009 I’ve increased the commission’s budget by $1.7 million, a 26 per cent increase, to make sure that the commission is able to implement the changes starting this year. We’ll use these dollars to hire more staff, ensure that more legal resources are in place, and move the commission staff to new facilities away from those in my department.

We can also use these dollars to help the commission build the capacity it needs to more effectively serve those who are newly immigrated to Alberta from other parts of the world. Our focus is to reduce discrimination, Mr. Speaker, and to enhance the syst em’s ability to investigate and mediate complaints in a timely manner while maintaining fairness to all parties in the process. Over the past year I have received i nput from several interested groups, including the Sheldon Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership, faith leaders, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, and others.

The opinions of Albertans will continue to help ensure that the legislation reflects the core values and the principles of the province and its citizens. In our world today it is important to do everything we can to prevent discrimination and provide the means necessary to address it when it occurs. I think these changes will help us do that. However, many of the changes we would like to make to improve the complaint resolution process can only happen if these legislative amendments proceed. Mr. Speaker, I’m here to ask for support in improving the human rights system so that it can benefit all Albertans.

I move that we adjourn debate. [Motion to adjourn debate carried] 3:00 Bill 14 Carbon Capture and Storage Funding Act [Adjourned debate March 3: Dr. Taft] The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Currie. Mr. Taylor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to rise and join debate in second reading on Bill 14, the Carbon Capture and Storage Funding Act, and to add my own two cents’ worth to $2 billion worth of proposed legislation. [interjections] Do I hear some groans from the other side? I promise that’s the last bad joke of the afternoon, from me at any rate.

I think that by and large this is a good bill, and we will be supporting it as far as it goes. The problem that we have with this – and this is to speak to the broader issue of what we’re going to do about global warming and greenhouse gases in the province of Alberta in concert with the government of Canada and the govern- ment of the United States because it’s going to be a continent-wide approach. President Obama has made that pretty clear.

Prime Minister Harper has made it pretty clear that he is going to work with President Obama on a joint Canadian-U.S. project that will involve cap and trade systems most likely, effectively put a price on greenhouse gases, so this province is going to have to look at ways to reduce its emissions. Otherwise, it will suffer a significant loss of competitiveness. Carbon capture and storage is unquestionably one way of doing that, one way that is in many respects ideally suited to the geology of this province.

The very same reservoirs that produce the oil and gas that made this province what it is today are now a natural storage point for carbon dioxide. There’s the potential added benefit that the injection of the carbon dioxide down into these reservoirs can help us engage in some enhanced oil recovery or enhanced coal-bed methane recovery, so that could in effect create some revenue that will go some way to defray th e costs of the carbon capture and sequestration system. So, you know, it’s good as far as it goes. It has some very real applications, I think, for this province.

It has some very real applications for large point emitters, as they are called, the institu- tions that put out a lot of carbon dioxide in one pl ace. That means in this province fossil fuel elect rical generating stations, and that really is the single major source of our greenhouse gas emissions. Coal-fired generating stations are responsible for producing almost half of the power that we generate in the province of Alberta. Good solution for that. No question about it.

G ood solution in terms of upgraders for bitumen, should we get some significant number of them off the ground, because capturing and transporting the carbon requires infrastructure spending, so the desire is to get as much carbon as possible out of one pl ace, and we have some good candidates for that. We have some candidates, too, that are not so good. I mean, there has been much talk from the government side about how this will be applied in the oil sands. In that upgraders are part of the oil sands process, it certainly applies there.

But there are some real doubts at this point, as I understand it, about whether carbon capture and sequestration is really a solution that you can apply to the many small power plants that are burning natural gas to provide steam for steam-assisted gravity drainage for that kind of oil sands extraction, so that may be a problem. Nevertheless, this is a big step in the right direction. So what’s our concern, really, with it? Well, the concern is that it’s the only step in the direction of reducing greenhouse gasses whether we’re talking about intensity-based targets or actual emissions.

I know that there are others in this House that will have and probably have in many different opportunities, many different venues, many different formats debated that question of intensity-based targets versus actual emissions. I’m not going to go there right now. For the purposes of my argument this doesn’t make any difference. For the purposes of my argument what I’m saying is that carbon capture and sequestration is the only tool we have in the box, the only magic trick we can pull out of our bag of magic tricks, and I think that’s part of the problem here. So let’s go ahead and do carbon capture and storage.

Let’s go ahead and pass the Carbon Capture and Storage Funding Act, but let’s also be far more aggressive on some of the other options, the other methods of addressing greenhouse gas emissions. That’s where I find that the government’s strategy around greenhouse gas emissions is lacking at this point. Perhaps it wouldn’t have been lacking so much if the government was going to be a little more aggressive about Green TRIP. Green TRIP was announced with much fanfare at the same time as carbon capture and sequestration, and each project, each strategy had $2 billion set aside for it.

That aggregate total of $4 billion does still exist although under Bill 33, the Fiscal Responsibility Act, and the provisions of Budget 2009 the proposal is to move those monies along with the capital account into the new sustai nability fund to give a total of about $17 billion in emergency savings that’ll get us through the tough times ahead.

I understand the rationale behind that and agree with some of it and maybe have some problems around the edges of some of it, but agreeing with the rationale doesn’t change the fact that all the real money dedicated to Green TRIP in this coming fiscal year has been reduced from a potential $2 billion. It’s not that I think that there was ever a plan to try and spend $2 billion on buses and LRT cars and innovative public transit systems in one year, but that $2 billion promise has been whittled down in real terms to $10 million this

April 29, 2009 Alberta Hansard 885 year, which is the price, depending on the model that you buy, of maybe 20 buses or 10 LRT cars, which doesn’t make a huge difference there. The reason why I bring this up is because we know that public transit could make a significant difference. We know that getting cars off the road makes a difference, and we know if from nothing else than the Calgary experience – and, by the way, I suspect that very shortly we’re going to see that experience replicated here in Edmonton now that the south leg of the Edmonton LRT is open.

We know what the experience in Calgary has been over the last five, seven, 10 years, which is this: every time the city of Calgary can get its hands on another set of C-Train cars to put on those tracks, it’s a matter, it seems, of moments, Mr. Speaker, a matter of days before that additional rolling stock is full to capacity. If you build it and it can get you from point A to point B, they will come, and they will ride it, even in Alberta, which had, certainly when I moved here 23 years ago, a reputation as the last province in the world where anybody ever wanted to get on a bus or public transit.

Well, times have changed, and urban Albertans are certainly very willing and very eager to ride public transit when it gets them in a quick and efficient manner from where they are to where they need to be. Certainly, LRT systems do that.

I know that we talked, the Transportation minister and I, in Transportation department estimates debates about the desire for some innovative developments in rapid transit, regional transit programs, that sort of thing. 3:10 The thinking is going on on the government side of the House and the thinking is going on at a lot of other different levels around making public transit work well in Alberta: regional transit systems, for instance, regional transit models that complement one another. It’s just that it’s not very possible to do much about it with only $10 million in the budget.

We do a little bit of early stage planning, but you’re not going to get too deep into that. That’s one example, Mr. Speaker, of alternative methods of addressing greenhouse emissions and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The point here, really – and I could go on. It doesn’t appear that anybody in the House thinks I’m going on and on and on too long yet, so I’ll wrap it up here pretty quick. The point is that there are a number of alternatives – sorry; alternatives is the wrong word to use, Mr.

Speaker – a number of options in addition to carbon capture and storage that we, I believe, should be pursuing as aggressively as possible given that this is a different fiscal and economic climate than a year ago. As the President of the Treasury Board and I discussed at some length in estimates last night, that requires different approaches, but it also requires some re-engineering of the way we’ve always done things. Here’s a classic example of something that allows for precisely that.

It’s not even so much re-engineering as engineering something entirely new because we really haven’t responded to the greenhouse gas threat in a meaningful way yet. This Bill 14 is a good start. There’s no question about that in my mind. I will be voting for it along, I think, with my colleagues when the time comes at the various stages, but I would urge the govern- ment to produce some follow-up legislation really quick that addresses some of the other options so that we’re not putting all our carbon reduction eggs in one basket. With that, Mr.

Speaker, I’ll take my seat and see if there are others who wish to join the debate. Thank you. The Speaker: Well, the hon. member now can participate under Standing Order 29(2)(

a) in a five-minute question-and-comment period if there are questions to the hon. member. There being no questions, the chair is ready to recognize another speaker. The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Bill 14, the Carbon Capture and Storage Funding Act, is of course, as we all know, a very important one in terms of how we address the emissions that we create in this province.

I, for one, would certainly never dream of standing up here – I certainly have some opinions on things that I have read – to say that I really fully understand exactly how all of this works and the ins and outs of the good and the bad. I guess a question from someone who doesn’t come from within the industry would be: 20 years from now how do we know this stuff isn’t going to bubble up out of the ground? [The Deputy Speaker in the chair] Having said that, this is a good bill and clearly one that has to be done.

The object is really to establish a fund that would provide for projects that capture and store carbon dioxide emissions. The bill would set up a $2 billion fund that would provide for a number of carbon capture and storage projects in Alberta. Currently the government is planning five projects. The government plans for the systems set up under this fund to store around 5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide annually by 2015. I would like to repeat at this point, too, what my colleague from Calgary-Currie has said, that I th ink we really have to look at alternative methods as well as the carbon capture.

Of course, the thing that I would like to see the most is huge conservation of our energy so that we don’t have to produce as much. The government needs to be able to try to create other tools so that the public interest in the investment is protected and emphasized. The carbon dioxide emissions are a serious problem for the global climate, as we all know. Man-made carbon dioxide levels are far above the natural base level. The excess gas prevents natural venting of the planetary heat, so the world is steadily warming.

The exact impacts of this warming are not known, but the general probabilities are, and they imply a world with much more severe weather conditions, rising sea levels, increased massive disruption to human, animal, and plant life all over the planet. At this point I would just like to sort of make a bit of a personal observation. Yes, I am worried about climate change, but what I’m more worried about is right next to home, right down at my level. I’m worried about the fact that we should conserve.

The other thing that I’m even more worried about is the pollution that we are creating on our planet that has really nothing to do with climate change. I think that is a whole other issue, but climate change often seems to be the umbrella that they use over everything. I’m worried about the fact that our rivers are polluted. I’m worried about the fact that our air is polluted. I’m not sure what kind of food I’m eating. It’s these sorts of things, that are actually right on my doorstep and affect me every day, that I’m probably more worried about than the actual climate change as a subject.

The climate change in Alberta will probably be felt primarily in the increase in drought conditions as rainfall lessens and the glaciers that feed our rivers shrink. Again, the glaciers may be shrinking, but when we look at them, there’s a tremendous amount of pollution caught in the ice of those glaciers. In 2006 the British government commissioned a report by Sir Nicholas Stern on the economic impacts of climate change. The report suggested that by the middle of the century unabated climate change could cost the global economy between 5 and 20 per cent of the global GDP, equivalent to trillions of dollars.

The naturally occurring greenhouse gases help regulate the earth’s

Alberta Hansard April 29, 2009886 climate by trapping heat in the atmosphere and reflecting it back to the surface. Over the past 200 years increased atmospheric concen- tration of greenhouse gases resulting from human activity such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation have amplified this process. The deforestation, I believe, can be very easily fixed. Probably it’s an easier fix than the greenhouse emissions and the trillions of dollars that it will cost us for carbon capture. This is just a very small example.

My constituency office is right next to a tire place that actually regrinds the tires and retreads them, and there is a smell coming out of there, and just not too far down the road are Canbra and Maple Leaf foods, that fry potatoes. That odour isn’t all the best in the world either, and we get those odours in my office. What I decided I would do is get plants. I now have five large plants and four small plants. Everyone knows that I’m not good with plants, so I’ve hired a plant lady who keeps them alive for me.

I cannot prove it, and I don’t have any scientific evidence, but I know that the air quality in my office as a result of those plants is better. We notice it every day. We even noticed it in the winter when the heat was on. Again, there’s a different odour that goes through. So deforestation, I think, is a huge area that we could be looking at because the trees do suck up the carbon that’s in the air. Alberta is one of the worst jurisdictions in the world in terms of per capita carbon dioxide emissions.

In the data from various sources, including the government of Canada, the United Nations, and the World Resources Institute , Alberta has a worse per capita emission of greenhouse gases than Qatar, which is the worst country in the world. In other words, if Alberta were a country, it would be at the top of the list of greenhouse gas producers. The emissions in Alberta for 2005, according to the government of Canada, were 71 tonnes per person, with only Saskatchewan slightly ahead at 71.6 tonnes. 3:20 I think that those kinds of statistics are not new to us.

I don’t think that anyone is surprised at those statistics. I think that the government does recognize that there are some pretty strong reasons out there why we should be doing this carbon capture, and kudos to them for going ahead and looking at what we can do. I think there’s still a lot of work to be done on what’s going to happen. As I’ve mentioned before, what will be the long-term effects of this? One of the main reasons, of course, for Alberta’s oversized emissions is our reliance on fossil fuels. Again, we would go back to wind power with our windmills and, certainly, the wind that we have.

I can certainly vouch for southern Alberta in the massive winds that we have, of course the argument being that they aren’t steady at all times. Then my next thing would be that the sun in southern Alberta usually is quite steady. Between the sun and the wind I think that we could have a very steady source for creating our energy. Most of the other provinces in Canada have access to cleaner solutions such as hydro power. That means that they don’t produce greenhouse gases.

Ontario produces much of its electricity through nuclear power, which, while it has all sorts of other environmental concerns that do not make it a good option for addressing climate change, does mean that there are fewer greenhouse gases emitted. One of the things that I think about Ontario being able to produce hydro power is that we have to have a way – and this is one thing that is a starting point. I know I’ve spoken against TILMA, not so much the concept, again, not the what but the how, but I think it’s a starting point.

So my question after that starting point would be: why is a lot of Ontario’s hydro power going to the States? Why are we not doing east-west? Why are we not working tighter as a country and opening up barriers? The answer, probably, to part of that is that we need transmission lines. Well, I think that possibly we should be sitting down and talking about transmission lines east- west because hydro power, of course, is so renewable. In southern Alberta it may not be so renewable. Certainly, water is a problem in Alberta. But in Ontario at this point in time it isn’t.

The main way in which emissions could be reduced in coming years will be through the imposition of market forces through cap- and-trade systems or carbon taxes. These will put a price on greenhouse gases either directly or indirectly, causing people to move towards other sources of energy. I’m not sure that that’s a bad thing. In fact, I think it’s a g ood thing. I think that we will be looking at solar panels on our garages. We will be looking at small windmills on the tops of our houses. We w ill be looking at better forms of conservation within our homes, within our businesses.

I spoke last week about a business that we have in Lethbridge that has done that very thing. They have not only cut down on their use of energy, but they have ways of conserving their heat so that they can even recycle their own heat internally. These are the kinds of things we really have to be looking at. In terms of the cap and trade President Obama has stated that he’ll bring in the cap and trade. The response of the Prime Minister suggested that this will be a joint Canada-U.S. project.

As Alberta is covered by the system, the province will have to look at ways of reducing emissions; otherwise, it will suffer a significant loss of competitiveness. I think that from some of the things that we have been hearing just lately even out of California, I’m not sure that cap and trade is up for discussion anymore. I think it’s something that will be going ahead. Cap and trade is often touted as the solution to the oil sands’ reputation as a greenhouse gas pollution problem, one of the things that comes partly along with our oil sands. Again I’m back to this: why aren’t we going east-west?

Why aren’t we keeping some of our stuff in Canada? We have so few upgraders in this province, and we are shipping our bitumen south, which is not a surprise to anyone. We need more upgraders. If we can’t put them here, then let’s put them in Saskatchewan; let’s put them in B.C.; let’s put them in Manitoba. Let’s put them where we can start doing our trade going east-west. There’s nothing wrong with sending some of our product to the States to be manufactured and then sold back to us, but I th ink that we can do it ourselves. I think we owe it to ourselves because these are, after all, our natural resources.

I think that we should get the very last dollar out of our own natural resources. We are more than capable of doing it. I think that incentives for upgraders should be on the table in terms of discussions. One of the things that, as usual, comes to my mind is that as with almost every single bill that I’ve dealt with, certainly more lately than before, there are so many regulations that allow the Lieutenant Governor in Council to make these regulations relating to all and any aspect of the bill and the bill’s inte nt. Again, many of these things should be very clearly defined and put in legislation.

It’s a tremen- dous amount of power within very few people’s hands, which, of course, we know is cabinet. These are the things that should be really clear in the legislation so that surprises don’t come. This kind of behaviour can also lead to . . . [Ms Pastoor’s speaking time expired] Thank you. The Deputy Speaker: Hon. members, we have five minutes available for comments or questions. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Castle Downs. Mr. Lukaszuk: Thank you. I was listening intently to our col- league. There’s one thing I always want to ask, and I wonder what her position on it is.

I’ve been here long enough to remember this

April 29, 2009 Alberta Hansard 887 discussion being a little bit around where there were proposals to build upgraders and refinery capacity around Edmonton, particularly in the heartland. It was not uncommon for members of her own caucus and the ND caucus to rise in here and say: “Stop that. There are environmental concerns. This needs to be studied and studied over again. Delay it.

Make it last.” Often those who invest big dollars in building upgraders and refineries clearly told us: you know, it’s much easier to do it south of the 49th parallel because we don’t have to put up with the opposition and the barriers that are being put before us in Alberta. I wouldn’t say a lot but the majority of this opposition was coming from your caucus and some from the ND caucus. Now you’re on the other side arguing that if only we’d built more upgraders and refineries, we wouldn’t be shipping bitumen down south. How do you reconcile that? The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East.

Ms Pastoor: Thank you. Thank you very much for that, hon. colleague. If I recall, prior to the last election one of the things that we spoke about was our policy called Western Tiger. That was to share upgrading with Saskatchewan and B.C. I’m not quite sure where that’s coming from. The fact that things are cheaper south of the border because of less environmental oversight I don’t think holds true anymore under the Obama administration. I think it’s very clear that they are very aware of the need for strong environ- mental studies.

In fact, I might be wrong and stand to be corrected, but I do believe that the Obama government has also backed off on some of the drilling they were going to allow offshore and in some of their protected areas in terms of a massive park, I believe, in Alaska. I think that they’ve backed off on allowing that. Times have certainly changed by elections both here in the province and in the United States. But clearly, our policy was called the western tiger, and we really did want upgraders to be shared across western Canada. 3:30 Mr. Lukaszuk: Mr.

Speaker, unless I’m missing something, you’re arguing that all this upgrading capacity should have been built in Alberta since the inauguration of President Obama because the rules have changed so drastically in the United States since that time, and you’re also arguing that we should have built refining and upgrading capacity in Saskatchewan and Manitoba and not have been building it in Alberta. The Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Lethbridge-East. Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Nice stretch. Nice stretch. Good try. No, not at all.

I’m not saying anything about what has happened since the Obama administration, which is – what? – a hundred days old. I don’t think anyone has had a chance to even have some good beers in the meantime in a hundred days. It’s not that long. No. What we were saying with the western tiger was that we need to keep our upgraders in Canada. Saskatchewan was certainly going toward that, and they were getting some money. The point is: let’s keep our upgraders here; let’s keep our own natural resources here. We don’t n ecessarily always have to be Alberta first.

There’s nothing wrong with sending our bitumen to Saskatchewan, where they, too, could have upgraders. It isn’t always about us, us, us. It’s supposed to be about us as Canadians. The Deputy Speaker: Any other hon. member to take the five minutes? Seeing none, the chair shall now recognize the hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona on the bill. Ms Notley: Thank you. It’s a pleasure to be able to rise to partici- pate in the debate on Bill 14, the Carbon Capture and Storage Funding Act. This is my first opportunity to speak to this bill since it’s been introduced.

I’d like to start right at the outset by saying that unlike other members in this House, I and the rest of my caucus will be voting against this bill. We do not support it. So that’s sort of the introductory comment to this. Having said that, I’d like to give a few reasons for why that would be the case. I think that, you know, the idea of carbon capture and storage is an untested but theoretically possible effective means to control greenhouse gas emissions.

I think the idea of pursuing something which has a great risk to it but which has the potential, maybe, to play a role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in some contexts can be a worthwhile venture. I appreciate that the objective here, in theory anyway, is to find some way for Alberta to commence some activity, any activity, geared towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions and that this might ultimately be a solution.

The difficulty is that, first of all, most experts on the issue don’t believe that it will actually function as any kind of meaningful solution within the next 25 years and potentially much longer than that. In addition, we are, as this government has said to us repeat- edly in the last few weeks and months, in a new world in Alberta. We are in a world where we have to look very, very critically at every dollar we spend, and we have to know that we’re doing it wisely on behalf of Albertans.

Frankly, as members opposite have said repeatedly, sometimes when you are in that environment, you need to pick winners and losers. You know, not everything can be funded. Not every program can be funded, not every service can be provided, and now we’re in a process of picking winners and losers. In that context I think you have to bring a very, very critical eye to this process, this carbon capture storage experiment, and the $2 billion price tag which is attached to this carbon capture and storage experiment. It is, as I’ve said, very, very costly, and it has, of course, yet to be proven.

There is some good theoretical science out there – absolutely – but there is no example. Mr. Liepert: Go to Weyburn. Ms Notley: I know all about Weyburn, but it’s not far enough along to justify a $2 billion investment. It’s not. It’s absolutely not. I will get to why it is still only a theoretical success, but I want to talk first about what we’re losing. What we’re doing is that we’re losing $2 billion out of our budget.

We are losing $2 billion, that is not going to health care, which is not going to bring more nurses in, which is not opening long-term care beds, which is not expanding hospitals, which is not doing – and this is the key point – a whole bunch of other far more effective stuff that would help bring our greenhouse gas emissions down. That is the place where I want to just start with this.

The fact of the matter is that there are far more efficacious ways to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions than the theoretical, very expensive science behind carbon capture and storage; that is, simply reducing the energy that we use through retrofitting, through reducing the energy that people use in their homes and in their businesses and in their cars. Anybody who knows anything about gree nhouse gas emissions knows that the biggest bang for our buck for greenhouse gas emissions – you need money to do that. You need money to retrofit. You need money to bring down our energy use rates.

You know what else that does? It creates jobs. You invest that money into

Alberta Hansard April 29, 2009888 broad-based retrofitting and energy reduction strategies. You put Albertans back to work. You know what? The second that retrofit is done to a building, that building stops producing as much greenhouse gas. So it works, and it works better. The stats out there show, as this government in the past u