Alberta Hansard — 2 April 1976, Morning sitting (10:00) (Legislature 18, Session 2)

19760402

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

April 2, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 529 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Friday, April 2, 1976 10:00 a.m. [The House met at 10 a.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure today to introduce to you, and through you to the Assembly, 38 students from Grade 10 in the Crescent Heights High School in Medicine Hat, accompanied by two teachers. Audrey Staven and Walter Hogg. They are seated in the members gallery. I would ask that the members of the Assembly welcome them to this Legislature. head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. MINIELY: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to table the annual report of the Alberta Hospital Visitors Commit tee for 1975. MISS HUNLEY: I wish to table the answer to Question 146, asked by the hon. Leader of the Opposition; and a Public Contributions Act [report], as required by statute. MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table the fifth annual report of the Environment Conservation Authority, as required by statute. MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table the 70th annual report of the Department of Education, accompanied by the financial and statistical report of Alberta school boards for the fiscal year 1974.

Tribute to Clerk of the Assembly MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I may rise on a point of personal privilege. I will not be able to be present when the House adjourns today. Incidentally, I'm not going down to the Tory convention to take

part in the festivities this weekend. But I do want to take this opportunity to put on the record my very best wishes . . . MR. CLARK: Do you think you'd feel at home? MR. NOTLEY: Do I think I'd feel at home? Well, I'd feel at home anywhere. If I feel at home here in the House, I can probably feel at home at the Tory convention. But, Mr. Speaker, the point of personal privilege was to wish our retiring Clerk, Mr. MacDonald, the very best in the future. Bill MacDonald, in my view, has been a friend to all the members of the Legisla ture. His courtesy, his understanding, his patience have just been outstanding.

I'll always remember him as the very best symbol of what our legislative system is all about. [applause] head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Crime Inquiries MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct the first question to the Attorney General, in light of yester day's decision by the Supreme Court of Canada, with regard to the powers of provinces to become involved in inquiries into criminal action in the province, and following the Quebec situation and the appeal there, and the fact that the province of Alberta presented arguments to the Supreme Court in support of the provinces having that power constitutionally.

Is the Attorney General now in a position to indicate to the Legislature what steps the province of Alberta plans to take in light of this now established ability of the province to move in that area? MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, I have not had the opportunity to review the remarks of the court, or to consider their implications. I would like to reserve comment on that until a later date, but would be happy to raise it in the House in a few days. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister.

Would the minister, reporting to the House in a few days, be in a position at that time to indicate what immediate plans the province has — it relates to the decision of the Supreme Court and to comments the minister made in the House earlier — with regard to problems he sees on the horizon as to increased criminal activity in the province of Alberta? MR. FOSTER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would be happy if the House would offer the time to make such comments. I think we're all aware of the amendments to the Criminal Code being proposed before the House of Commons right now.

They have a direct bearing on this area as well. I'd be happy to discuss that at the same time. Early Childhood Services Program MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct the second question to the Minister of Education. The question flows from the decision of the Department of Education that youngsters who are five and a half years old in January or February of each year will not be eligible for grants under the early childhood services program. I brought the matter to the minis ter's attention.

Is the minister now in a position to indicate to the Assembly what progress his department has made in dealing with this inequity? MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, that matter is presently under consideration. I hope to be able to make an announcement during the course of the study of the estimates of the Department of Education. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister, so there's no misunderstanding. The

530 ALBERTA HANSARD April 2, 1976 minister indicates he's going to be able to make a statement in the House during the course of the study of his estimates, which I assume will be next week. Zone Policing MR. KUSHNER: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct this question to the Solicitor General. We had another serious instance of shooting in Calgary last night. I wonder if the Solicitor General can inform this House if the provincial government supports zone policing. MR. FARRAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, the tactics used by a particular police force are the responsibility of the chief of police and local police commission.

Zone policing is a well-established practice among police forces. It has its pros and its cons. The idea generally is that a police force decentralizes into neighborhoods. There is thereby greater contact with the community, which gets to know the same police men instead of different ones responding from a central bureau. Decentralization is often more costly than running a centralized operation. There are degrees to which zone policing can be done. I believe in Calgary they've only taken the first step of allocating sections of the police force to quadrants of the city.

They haven't got zone complaint offices in the form of the old precincts that used to be common practice among police forces. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the minister. Has the minister or his department had discussions with other municipalities in the province of Alberta to implement the zone concept in policing? MR. FARRAN: No, Mr. Speaker. I think I prefaced my remarks by saying that it must be the choice of the officer in command, who is the chief of police, to adopt the centralized policy or the decentralized policy of zone policing. MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. Is the minister, along with the Calgary police department, involved in an assessment as to the effectiveness of zone policing in Calgary? Has any type of formal or informal assessment taken place by your department along with the city of Calgary? MR. FARRAN: None by my department, Mr. Speaker. That would be, again, a question for the police commission, because there are cost aspects to zone policing. I understand there's been some comment in the press, asking for a cost-benefit analysis of zone policing, but again it's a matter for the local authority.

My responsibility for law enforcement in the province is indirect so far as municipal police forces are concerned. DR. BUCK: A supplementary to the hon. minister. In light of the fact that we're looking at the concept of zone policing, can the minister indicate if his depart ment, or any other group he's associated with, has looked at getting the policemen back on the beat, the philosophy that has been used in so many large American cities, especially in the large urban areas? MR. FARRAN: Mr. Speaker, that's exactly the concept of zone policing.

I don't know that they necessarily go so far as to put policemen back on their feet, in terms of foot patrols, but the idea is at least to decentralize the automobiles so they're always in the same area. The policemen get to know the bad actors in the community and perhaps can carry out a greater degree of crime prevention through co-operation and support for juveniles. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. The question I asked the hon. minister was: has his department looked at or done any studies on the concept of getting the police directly back on the beat? MR.

SPEAKER: With respect, it would seem the hon. minister has answered precisely that question. He explained that that was part of the zone concept, and he has answered his department's connection with it. Community Crime Prevention MR. PURDY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the minister. Is the minister's office or department encouraging the use of the block parent concept in many of our metropolitan areas? MR. FARRAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The idea of community involvement in crime prevention is actively encouraged by my department. All such projects as neighborhood watch and block parents are good.

The closer the co-operation between police and the people, the greater chance there is for proper protection of life and property. Fertilizer Supplies MR. THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my question to the Minister of Agriculture. Could the minister inform the House on the supply of fertilizer available in the province for the coming year? MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, our information is that an excellent supply of all grades of fertilizer is available for Alberta farmers this year. There is, however, one very difficult problem.

About 60 per cent of the fertilizer we expect to be used this year by Alberta farmers has either not been ordered or not been delivered. The fertilizer plants, generally speaking, have their storage filled to capaci ty. If farmers do not move immediately, in terms of buying fertilizer and having it transported, many could find themselves without fertilizer come spring seeding. It's not only the difficulty in transportation. There is, as well, a difficulty at the plants, in terms of the physical loading of transportation facilities. MR. APPLEBY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder if the hon. minister has any information as to how the price levels will compare with last year. MR. MOORE: Generally speaking, Mr. Speaker, price levels in all grades of fertilizers are down somewhat from the high levels of 1974-75. I would have to get the exact figures, Mr. Speaker, but indeed there has been some decrease in prices in all grades.

April 2, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 531 Student Housing Report MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct my question to the hon. Minister of Advanced Education and Manpower. It concerns the release of the prelim inary report on student housing. Is the minister in a position to advise the Assembly when the government will be able to table the final report on student housing? DR. HOHOL: Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to remove some of the mystique and misinformation that attends that particular report. It was not leaked, because it wasn't in completed form.

It was in study and draft form, which I returned to the department for a different format and additional information. In saying this, I am in no way critical of the people who put the report together. It's often difficult to anticipate the exact nature of a report that somebody assigned and somebody else has to receive some months later. The report has been given to some people; for example, the advisory committee to the ministry on student affairs, as they make their own study. The report was returned to the department. It has been rewritten. It's been in my office as of a few days ago.

I've been doing some reading and editing. I'm making sure that before I release information, I'm completely familiar with it and can respond to questions and interpret the report to the media, people, and institutions. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques tion. Do I take it the report itself is now completed? Could the minister give us a date when he expects to table the report? DR. HOHOL: No, I couldn't, Mr. Speaker, except the commitment that I will release it as soon as possible.

I'm reading the report and making sure the factor of readability is at the highest possible level; consistent, for example, with the hon. Member for Medicine Hat-Redcliff, who spoke on statutes. I think the same thing applies to reports. They should be extremely readable, as a car ought to be tested for roadability. Consistent with that, the report will be out as soon as possible. If you will permit me, Mr. Speaker, because of the importance of the subject, I should like to point out there's nothing unusual in the report.

It simply describes the condition with respect to student housing in all institutions of advanced education in the province, and indicates what some of the options and alternatives will be. I want to say that no institution and certainly not my department, nor this government, nor I personally have been waiting for the report in terms of what to do. Certain institutions have taken initiatives. We have responded to them in terms of residences, housing, or buildings. The report has not, you know, been in the way of the freight train as far as student housing is concerned. Mr.

Speaker, I might say, too, the initiatives taken by the government through the — my colleague, the hon. Minister of Housing and Public Works, is as open to institutions of advanced education as he is to any other sector in the province. MR. NOTLEY: A supplementary question to the hon. minister. Will any specific measures be planned while the minister is worrying about readability? Will any specific measures be planned in the current fiscal year to alleviate the difficult situation with respect to off-campus apartment-style student housing? DR. HOHOL: I should like to make two comments, Mr. Speaker.

The question permits me to do it, and I appreciate the question. It's clear, as we begin to move into the estimates, that the matter of capital expenditures for 1976-77, and likely subsequently, is going to be very low. The government's appropriation for combined oper ations and capital expenditures is well into the minus in double digits. That's the result of the reduction in capital expenditures to make some provision, as close as possible to them in per cent, in operating costs.

For the record, there will be little in the way of capital construction of any kind in institutions of advanced education, including the subject before us this morning. MR. SPEAKER: With great respect to the hon. minis ter, it would seem to me that this information, which is now being given to the House on a subject which is undoubtedly of great importance, would be precisely the kind of information that might be given in the discussion of the hon. minister's estimates. MR. CLARK: A supplementary question to the minis ter. The question flows from his comments about making the report readable.

I think he used the term "readability". I'd like to ask the minister if it's his department's policy to go through all the reports received and make them readable from the standpoint of the department, rather than leaving that judgment to the members of the Legislature or the people of Alberta. DR. HOHOL: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't want to make too much of the readability business, but it's impor tant. Once the department gives a minister a report, it's the minister's report. The minister takes full responsibility for what's in it and how it is put together. I take that responsibility.

As I say, I don't want to make too much of the readability. It's just one factor. I want to make sure I understand what's in the report. If I understand, it's likely the hon. Leader of the Opposition will under stand also. That's a 50-50 thing. I'm not certain. But I would take those chances. It's important to understand that a department's report ceases to be a department's report when it is given to a minister. It's the minister's report at that time, and he takes full responsibility for it. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister.

Will there be substan tial changes in content between the preliminary report, which was released the other day, and the final report? DR. HOHOL: No, Mr. Speaker. There wouldn't be a substantial difference in the content or the substantive nature of the report.

532 ALBERTA HANSARD April 2, 1976 DR. PAPROSKI: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Does the minister recognize the high vacancy rate in Lister Hall residences, relative to other residences? If he's aware of that, could he indicate to the House if he knows the cause of that high vacancy? DR. HOHOL: Mr. Speaker, I am aware that Lister Hall has a high vacancy rate. The reasons are several. Some are real and some are speculative. Certainly, one thing I know is that it's the responsibility of the Students' Union and the Board of Governors of the University of Alberta to get together on those matters.

But it's one of the considerations that government will undertake to examine as it looks at requests for housing at the University of Alberta. MR. NOTLEY: A final supplementary question. Has the government studied with the universities the feasibility of a program of income-based rents for university residences in Alberta? DR. HOHOL: Certainly we've looked at that. It's touched on in the report. Again, it is something that the hon.

Minister of Housing and Public Works and I have been looking at: these kinds of approaches to housing for low-income people, including by definition most, but not by any means all, university students. This is accessible to them. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, if I might just ask one more supplementary question? MR. SPEAKER: Possibly we should leave it at the final supplementary having been final. The Leader of the Opposition with a final supplementary, followed by a question from the hon. Member for Drumheller. MR. CLARK: One more supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the minister.

The question to the minister is simply this: is it the policy of the Department of Advanced Education and Manpower to rewrite to make more readable the reports the minister receives from his advisory committees prior to making them public, remembering that these are public advisory committees? DR. HOHOL: I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker, the question mystifies me, and I simply don't understand. The relationships of the six advisory committees to the minister are exactly that. The relationship between the advisory committee and the minister is bilateral.

The advisory committees advise the minister on such matters as they choose, and as I place before them. There's no recycling of the advisory committee or the minister to the Department of Advanced Education and Manpower. The relationship between the committees and me is wholesome and healthy. So the question is simply out of context, unless the hon. leader has additional information. If he does I wish he'd state it, and I'll attempt to respond. Health Care Commission Files MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care.

It involves the confidential nature of the files of the Alberta Health Care Insurance Commission. My question is: has there been any change in policy on the part of the Alberta Health Care [Insuran ce] Commission following the case outlined by the Ombudsman, where information was refused to the RCMP and the parents of a 16-year-old girl? MR. MINIELY: Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. member that basically we were acting on the advice of the Attorney General's Department in the interpre tation of legislation as it protected the confidentiality of a patient's or an Alberta citizen's information.

Based on that advice, we felt we had no alternative even though the information related to a 16-year-old person, as indicated in the Ombudsman's report. The advice we were given was that the act covered all citizens, regardless of age, and information that was confidential relative to citizens of Alberta. That's the reason we felt our hands were tied under the existing legislation and regulations that are now in place. I spoke to the Ombudsman about it at the time. That's not to say that we should not review the situation.

It certainly is one of the areas I've asked the Health Care Insurance Commission to review, working with me and of course in consultation with the Attorney General and the Legis lative Counsel, to see whether some changes should be made as a result of the ombudsman's report. MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary then to the hon. the Attorney General. Is protection not going too far when information is withheld from the RCMP and the parents of a minor child? MR. FOSTER: Mr.

Speaker, it runs in my mind that there are provisions in the legislation that protect the confidentiality of personal information on medical records and files. I cannot recall the legislation precisely. I'd have to review it. However, in my judgment, that is not intended to put that information beyond the reach of certain law enforcement officers if that information is material to establish fraud or other illegal conduct on the part of, for example, people in the health care field, doctors, et cetera.

In any event, that information would only be obtainable after careful screening, obviously in com pliance with the law. I didn't want to leave any suggestion that that information would be locked up completely without access to law enforcement agen cies. We'd have to be very, very careful that that information is used with discretion, and not to disclose the treatment that was given the individual citizen, and only for the purpose of establishing whether improper procedures have been used; for example, by the way accounts are billed or charged. MR. TAYLOR: One more supplementary.

The hon. minister answered about law enforcement agencies. What about parents of a minor child? MR. FOSTER: To my mind, Mr. Speaker, that is a much more difficult question. I would be hesitant to reply without being very careful of understanding the law on the subject at the moment. I'm not confident that I do. I would be happy to look at that problem and respond later in further detail.

April 2, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 533 Highway Safety MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transportation. In view of the dramatic decrease of approximately 35 per cent in highway traffic fatalities in the province of Ontario, as announced yesterday in their Legislature, I wonder if the minister could advise whether any further action is being taken to introduce mandatory seat belt laws in this province and to reduce the highway speed limit. DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, the decision made to date by the government is that we would first try the educational route.

We will have some major demon strations. As a matter of fact, I recommend to all hon. members that when they attend the home show next week, our safety branch will have a little demonstra tion that might effectively convince them that they should buckle up. In addition, Mr. Speaker, we will be making further recommendations in the Legisla ture, relative to the safety program we envisage. Pheasant Hatchery MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Minister of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife. Could the minister indicate at what stage the proposed pheasant hatchery in Brooks is at the present time?

MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, probably I would like to expand on that when we get into my budget. But I can say at this point that the property is in place on which the hatchery will be built, and we have funds in the budget for construction to start this year. Early Childhood Services Program (continued) MR. CHAMBERS: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education. It concerns a 5-year-old child who, because of age, would be eligible to enter Grade 1 in the fall, but whose mother and school principal think is not emotionally mature enough.

In that case, since it's advisable for the child to continue under the early childhood education pro gram, I wonder if that program would in fact fund the education of that child for the next year. MR. KOZIAK: Mr. Speaker, in answer to a question in a similar vein posed by the hon. Leader of the Opposition earlier in the question period, I indicated that that matter is presently under consideration. I'm not in a position at the moment to advise the House, but I hope to be at the time my estimates are before the Committee of the Whole. STEP Modifications DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to address my question to either the Minister of Business Develop ment and Tourism or the Minister of Advanced Education and Manpower. I would like to know if the small business student opportunity program will be operating again this summer. DR. HOHOL: No, Mr. Speaker, not under that kind of designation. The determination we made was to provide work opportunities in alternate or optional kinds of programs within the overall STEP for the summer, for the same students who had been in the small business program and who would normally have been this year. Homesteading MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Does the minister's office have studies under way on the subject of homesteading of land? If this is the case, were these studies reflected in the remarks of the minister at the improvement districts convention? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, we do not have studies with respect to homesteading of land in the improvement districts.

The remarks I made at the improvement district and counties meeting were indeed in the context that in terms of expanding into the improvement districts, it has to be understood that the delivery of services may be somewhat cur tailed because of budgetary restrictions. By delivery of services I would include such things as roads, school services, and these kinds of things. It was in that context that my references were made. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the minister, in light of his remarks.

Is the minister considering some type of limited homestead policy in the province of Alberta, where the homesteaders recognize that certain amenities he has mentioned such as roads, schools, et cetera are going to be restricted? MR. JOHNSTON: Not at all, Mr. Speaker, I wasn't really talking about homesteading as a philosophy or as a way of life. I was merely stating that those people who locate in an improvement district have to understand that the location can sometimes be diffi cult, given the finances and the delivery of services.

I was merely suggesting to the improvement districts that they had to plan their urbanization or settlement movements, if you like, so they tie in with the fiscal capacity to meet those needs, Mr. Speaker, and further, that they are articulated with some longer term plan. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, is the minister saying that if the local improvement districts are not responsible, he's going to take action to restrict homesteading in Alberta? DR. BUCK: Shoot straight from the mouth. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, I didn't say that at all, of course. Brucellosis DR. PAPROSKI: Mr.

Speaker, a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Is the incidence and preva lence of brucellosis in cattle in Alberta a very serious issue at this time? What is the Alberta government's responsibility to this cattle disease?

534 ALBERTA HANSARD April 2, 1976 MR. SPEAKER: With great respect to the hon. member, and it is a matter of sincere regret that I interrupt him again, could I just draw the Assembly's attention to Standing Order No. 2, which obliges the Chair, in unprovided-for cases, to follow parliamentary tradition. That leads us directly to 171 of Beauchesne. In several ways in the citation in Beauchesne and the subsequent citations, questions which contain or seek expressions of opinion are out of order in the question period.

I realize that it would completely stultify the objects of the question period if these guidelines were too strictly enforced, but there does have to be some limit to the latitude. I would respectfully suggest that the question to which I am now referring is an out-and- out inquiry for the minister's statement on an outright matter of opinion. DR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, then I'll reframe the question, and hopefully it will be accepted. What is the Alberta government's responsibility in relationship to the disease known as brucellosis in cattle? MR. MOORE: Well, Mr.

Speaker, as far as I am aware, the major responsibility for the disease the hon. member refers to rests with the federal health of animals branch. Indeed, this province has a keen interest in seeing that it is brought under control, and our veterinary staff throughout the province is con tinually involved in checking and reporting on the incidence of the disease. In addition, we are involved of course in the distribution of vaccine when that is required, the vaccine being provided by the Govern ment of Canada. DR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques tion on that same topic.

Is the minister aware of any cases of human infection of brucellosis being reported in the past year? MR. MOORE: No, Mr. Speaker, I'm not. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the hon. minister. Just for clarification, are cattle that come into Alberta from other provinces controlled under federal laws, or are there provincial laws that prevent infected cattle from coming into Alberta? MR. SPEAKER: In view of the remarks just made with regard to the preceding question, I would have to say that this one also does not come within the scope of the question period. Government Legal Assistance MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the Attorney General, and it flows from concern being expressed to me with regard to the appointment by the government of certain legal firms to do work for the government. My question to the minister is this: is the Attorney General responsible for the allocation to various law firms of legal work being done by the various government departments, or is that decision in fact made by each minister? MR. FOSTER: I think the legislation is fairly clear, Mr. Speaker, that the Crown is represented in the courts by the Attorney General.

Sometimes we obtain outside legal assistance; that is, persons who are not in the employ of the Crown. In criminal matters, that employment is usually arranged by the director of criminal justice; in civil matters, by the director of civil law. Occasionally a government department has, on its own, obtained outside counsel to resolve legal matters involving that department, but generally speaking the consultation work is done by the two directors to whom I have referred.

I am frequently called for consultation in the selec tion of outside counsel to determine whether or not, in my judgment, this certain firm or individual who may be called upon is experienced and able in this area of the law. That is not frequent, but it hasn't been unusual for me to be involved in those decisions. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the minister. Is the Attorney General consulted on the selection of outside counsel by government boards and agencies?

In other words, do the boards and agencies come to the Attorney General either to advise him, or to seek his advice on what legal firm they are going to use? MR. FOSTER: The practice has not been common for boards and agencies to contact me. In some cases, boards and agencies have their own solicitors in their employ full-time. They are not employees of this department. Frankly, I am considering whether they should be. Certainly the lawyers who are in other government departments are, I think, without excep tion now members of this department.

Whether the lawyers who are in the employ of various Crown boards, agencies, and commissions should be in this department is a matter which I think should be looked at. But I'm not anxious to pursue it. There are some agencies which have a great deal of work; for example, the Alberta Housing Corporation. The Minister of Housing and Public Works is responsible for that corporation and techn ically would be charged with the responsibility of employing various outside people to assist in many capacities of legal and other kinds of consulting and professional expertise.

It's been the practice of my colleague to consult me on the selection of private lawyers to do work for the corporation. That's a discussion in relationship between that particular minister and me. In those cases, again, my function is to look at the individual and the firm involved, and determine whether that individual has the expertise to carry out the function, not only in my judgment but in that of others whom I may contact. Again, the contact has not been substantial, but I've had occasion to do some. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question to the Attorney General.

Has the same kind of consultation gone on among the Attorney General's Department, the Minister of Agriculture, and the Minister of Business Development and Tourism before appointments have been made by the Ag. Development Corporation and the Alberta Oppor tunity Company? MR. FOSTER: I believe so. I don't recall having been consulted on any appointments, at least recently, in

April 2, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 535 the Alberta Opportunity Company, and not to my memory in the Ag. Development Corporation in the last while. If they were involved with outside counsel or changing the lists of lawyers who are doing work for them in the civil area, I'm confident that both my colleagues would discuss these initiatives with me. MR. CLARK: One further supplementary question to the minister.

I wonder if the minister would go back and check with the department to see if there was consultation with the Attorney General's Department prior to decisions made with regard to selection of legal counsel and local appointments for the Ag. Development Corporation and the Alberta Opportunity Company, and report back to the Assembly. MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I can report right now that no consultation has ever taken place between me, as Minister of Agriculture, and the Attorney General, with respect to hiring legal counsel for the Ag. Development Corporation.

Indeed, there's been very little consultation among me and the chairman and management of the Ag. Development Corpora tion. I felt that the requirement for legal staff in ADC is pretty extensive throughout the province. General ly, that matter is handled by the chairman of the board and the general manager of the corporation. MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, I would like to report from the Opportunity Company that there has been no consultation whatsoever between me and the Attorney General regarding appointment of legal counsel for the Opportunity Company.

However, I did have some discussion at a policy conference with the principals of the Opportunity Company, which is autonomous in the governing of its function. With regard to the practice of hiring legal counsel, the situation that exists now, and has prevailed for some time, is that they simply hire the people they believe are competent in the areas they require. I made some suggestion that perhaps in future they might examine further employment of legal counsel in all areas of the province in a geographic sense.

However, I was apprized that in most situations the type of expertise required is of a specific nature and in many cases is not available in each local commu nity. But they do try, and have been directed to decentralize legal counsel without being specific. There has never been any firm earmarked by me at all, or any indication that one should be. There has been no consultation whatsoever with the Attorney General. MR. CLARK: One further supplementary question to the Minister of Business Development. I wouldn't want to misunderstand his answer at all.

The question is simply this: is it the position of the Minister of Business Development that neither he nor his predecessor, on any occasion, has told the Alberta Opportunity Company or advised them what legal counsel they should acquire? MR. DOWLING: Mr. Speaker, I can speak for myself alone. There has never, ever, been a situation where I've advised the Opportunity Company board or its directors on what legal counsel should be appointed. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the last supplementary on this topic. MR. CLARK: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the Minister of Agriculture. Is the Minister of Agriculture in a position to indicate to the Assembly whether he or his predecessor has given direction at any time to the Agricultural Development Corporation as to what legal counsel they should select across the province? MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I've not given them direction with respect to what legal counsel they should hire.

But on a number of occasions, when it was drawn to my attention that farmers applying for loans were having to travel quite some distance for legal assistance available in a closer centre, I have forwarded to the chairman of the Ag. Development Corporation names of individual law firms in that centre that he might consider using for the corpora tion's legal work there. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might ask just one further supplementary question, in light of what the minister has said.

Is the minister in a position now, or perhaps when we do the Attorney General's departmental estimates, to give us some indication of the kind of criteria he used in making that representa tion to the Ag. Development Corporation? MR. SPEAKER: Possibly that question could be put on the Order Paper. Restitution Program MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Solicitor General, again, in connection with the restitution program. Why is restitution confined to the amount of the deductible, where an insurance policy is in effect on the damaged premises? MR. FARRAN: Mr.

Speaker, I'd have to take that question under advisement and check with Dr. Klein, who's in charge of this pilot project in Calgary. It's beyond my knowledge at the moment. It's a detailed question, and I require more information before I can answer it. MR. TAYLOR: One further supplementary. The hon. minister might also check on why people who have had their premises damaged must sign a release for a waiver of the insurance before restitution is carried out by a person appointed by this body. Well Site Reclamation DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. Minister of Agriculture.

Earlier I asked if he could report to the Legislature the number of complaints he'd received about well sites that had been reclaimed and put back, so-called, in the condition they were before the well was put in. Could the hon. minister indicate if he has that information available now?

536 ALBERTA HANSARD April 2, 1976 MR. MOORE: Mr. Speaker, I think the question was my checking on the number of complaints that might have been received by the Department of Agriculture staff. I do not recall having received any directly. I do not yet have any information with regard to the number of complaints that might have been received by the Farmers' Advocate, the Surface Rights Board, or any other. But I'll try to get it as soon as I can. Rural Gas Co-ops DR. WARRACK: Mr. Speaker, earlier in the week the hon. Member for Little Bow asked a question that I took as notice and agreed to report.

The question had to do with whether a service area for a rural gas co-op had, during my time of responsibility, been permitted to go ahead with less than a 50 per cent sign-up. I've now checked and there is one circumstance. But let me explain that the franchise area is the entire boundary of a gas co-op and one or more, normally several, service areas comprise that franchise area; and then one or more, normally several, taps comprise the service area. A prior service area had been granted, which went ahead. In 1975 a second service area was permitted to go ahead, with 48 per cent sign-up, at Minco Gas Co-op.

That was the second service area. They've since applied for another service area. The act and the regulations under The Rural Gas Act permit this by way of special circumstances. I have that information before me, but I'll not take the time of the House unless someone desires it. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of privilege. I would like to make a correction on page 224 of Hansard. This was a slip of the tongue. I said "the town of Gleichen" when I meant the town of Strathmore.

I brought this to the attention of the Editor of Hansard almost immediately, but the tape did say Gleichen, and she felt it should be corrected in this way. So, I would like Gleichen struck out and Strathmore inserted. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. [Mr. Speaker left the Chair] head: GOVERNMENT MOTIONS (Committee of Supply) [Dr. McCrimmon in the Chair] MR. CHAIRMAN: The Committee of Supply will come to order. MR. MINIELY: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I could advise the hon. Leader of the Opposition with respect to some specific information he asked for the last time we met in Committee of Supply.

I've made some preliminary inquiries of the Treasury Department as to the reasonableness, or our ability to provide that information. I would like to ask the hon. Leader of the Opposition, because I'm getting conflicting views — I think the hon. leader will understand that the senior officials of the Treasury Department are all in Ottawa with the Provincial Treasurer. I would prefer that we wait until they come back. They would be back on Monday.

If the hon. leader would wait until Monday, when some of the senior officials and the Provincial Treasurer will be back, we can be sure of our capacity to meet the request of the hon. Leader of the Opposition. Department of Agriculture Appropriation 2.3 MR. CHAIRMAN: Turn to page 27, to 2.3. We had agreed to hold that vote. Mr. Minister, do you have any remarks with respect to this? MR. MOORE: Mr. Chairman, a number of questions were asked at the last committee session with respect to the Agriculture vote.

First of all, I'd like to state that I provided two members of the opposition [with] three different documents which indicate the Land Use Forum vote of $134,914 broken down. I'll provide further explanation of that later. As well, we've provided a breakdown of the travel and relocation expenses, and the hospitality expenses. As well, I've provided a breakdown, Mr. Chairman, of the fees and commissions, as they were previously described, but now come under the heading of personal service contracts, and profes sional, technical, and labor services.

For any other members who might be interested, there are addi tional copies of all three of those documents on the front of your desk, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make some general remarks about the hospitality vote, and this applies to all programs in the department. First of all, hospitality includes a good many direct payments which normally wouldn't be considered in the definition of the word "hospitality"; for example, hall rentals for all our short courses in the Department of Agriculture, winter short courses, that kind of thing.

It includes many of the expendi tures for the ag. development committees, of which there are 62 throughout the province, when they have hall rentals for meetings and that type of thing. It includes hall rentals for seminars for department staff. It includes the cost of the executive committee meetings of our department and the department annual conference. It includes the entire Agriculture Hall of Fame expenditures, rentals, and catering.

An item that could be considered within the strictest definition of hospitality is the hospitality provided to visiting officials and dignitaries from other parts of Canada or from other countries, of whom a good number come to Alberta in the agricultural context. That's a very brief overview of the kinds of things involved in that hospitality vote. I have, I think, provided a fairly complete breakdown of that hospita lity vote in this document, of which further copies are available there. Finally, on the Land Use Forum, I provided a copy of the breakdown of the $134,914. I indicated

April 2, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 537 previously that Dr. Wood would be in the employ of the government till the end of September, and I think I indicated the budget had budgeted for his employ ment till that time. In actual fact, salary was budgeted for his position for a full year. My under standing is that he will be retiring at the end of September. It is not yet known whether or not someone would come into that position to fill his place. In addition, the entire salary of Mr. Gylander has been budgeted for a full year.

Whether or not he will stay in a position of working on land use for the full year as well is not known. While the Land Use Forum has really wound up its work now, in terms of publishing a report, it's expected that a good [amount] of ongoing work needs to be done with respect to the report in the whole area of land use. It may have been more appropriate to provide for the employment dollars of these indi viduals in other parts of the department; however, it was continued under the Land Use Forum vote. In addition, there are wage moneys for a geographer and for clerical assistants.

I said I would indicate in more detail the kind of thing we expect Dr. Wood [to do]. Mr. Gylander, for at least the foreseeable future, will be assisting him. Those assignments will involve a number of things, some as yet undetermined. For example, Dr. Wood will be involved in the assessment of grazing rentals, dues, and other evaluations of grazing reserve, lease policies, and procedures. He's been asked to review those matters by the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. In addition, he will be involved in checking all statutes relating to land use, to show areas of overlap and conflict.

As I indicated the other day, he will be doing a thorough check on all trespass legislation as it relates to agricultural land. He will be looking at, and reviewing with some tax experts, the field of capital gains and unearned increment tax as it applies to agricultural land and farmers.

We expect he may well be assisting in drafting legislation on various suggestions in the Forum report which have been or will be agreed to, in terms of implementation, and in determining whether legislation is needed or there are alternate ways of accomplishing the recommen dations in the report, to which the government and the Legislature might agree. I'm confident that all those things, coupled with the fact that we want someone — most preferably over the short term, Dr. Wood and Mr.

Gylander — to be available to travel throughout the province to discuss the content of the report and the reasons for the recommendations with groups and individuals who request it. Indeed, we've already had a number of requests for someone from the Land Use Forum who developed the report or was involved in its develop ment to discuss it with local community organizations and others. That will be the work he will be involved in during the course of the next six months.

I cannot say at this time what direction the Forum or work of that nature will take after his retirement, or whether someone else will fill in there. Appropriation 1.2.4 MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, the question I had raised the other day was the Land Use Forum. The minister has made some comments on it. Our concern on this side of the House was just where the $135,000 was to be used, what value we were going to get from it. Do we have some definite plans, in the year ahead, for the use of those dollars? I appreciate some of the things the minister has said, and we certainly appreciate the outline given here.

That's the first thing I'd like to say. The second thing is: in any of my comments, I certainly don't want to reflect on Dr. Wood, his capability, and his long-time service to government. He has done a good job, and I respect the man very, very much. However, in saying that and listening to the things that have to be done for a sum of $88,000, plus a few other dollars that will be involved here, I'm not yet convinced the dollars will be spent wisely. But I'd like to ask two questions. With respect to Mr. Gylander, I note in the report that he was taken from the Department of Agriculture.

At that time, was his position kept in the budget? Is there a vote in the Estimates for Mr. Gylander, in case he returns to the Department of Agriculture, or have you reduced your departmental staff establishment by one because of his transfer to the Land Use Forum? As you've indicated, he has a full year's salary available to him under the Land Use Forum. The second question is with regard to local community output. I understand that Unifarm was working with the Land Use Forum or with your department in directing the reports to various communities.

Does Unifarm receive a grant or some of this money to send out those reports, or is their involvement part of that $30,000 grant we give them, or is the Department of Agriculture going to stand all the costs of sending out the reports through the Land Use Forum? Those are the two questions. MR. MOORE: First of all, on the latter question, there are no funds for Unifarm in this vote. In fact, copies of the report will be forwarded in a variety of ways: through my office, the Minister of the Environment, and indeed many MLAs, I think, are forwarding copies of the report.

I want to restate that any MLAs who require copies of the report can contact my office, and we'll provide them to you free of charge, within the reasonable limits of having them available, to send to your constituents. With respect to that situation, there's nothing in there for Unifarm. I've forgotten your first . . . MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Gylander, is he . . . MR. MOORE: There is no other position in the department for Mr. Gylander. In fact, his previous position is not vacant. It was filled.

If he came back to the department in another position during the course of the year, of course, the vote for his salary which is contained here would not be used, unless it was felt there was some area in the whole area of land use where we required someone else. I just cannot say whether he is going to stay working on this for a full year, or whether it's going to be four months or six months. I'd be quite pleased to have him back in the department, and I expect he will be in a position in the department before the year is out. If it were a new position in the department, there would

538 ALBERTA HANSARD April 2, 1976 be a transfer of a position, together with the appro priate dollars, from this vote into that new area. MR. R. SPEAKER: I'd like to know a little bit more about this local community involvement program. Do you intend to send personnel from the department, or some of the staff of the Land Use Forum, into the various communities to tell them what has happened in the Legislature since the report has been pre sented, or will they just re-examine the report? I understand some of that is already being done. MR.

MOORE: Very simply, there have been a number of requests, and we expect further requests, mostly from groups, to have someone who is knowledgeable about the contents of the report, and was involved in writing it, sit down with them and explain why they arrived at certain conclusions. Indeed, a tremendous amount of resource material was gathered by the Land Use Forum — quite a library of resource material on land use, legislation in other countries, and that kind of thing, that a good number of community groups or organizations are interested in.

So we are not really planning any province-wide campaign of talking to people about the report, but only responding to requests, as they come in, for someone to go to talk to them about the contents of the report. MR. R. SPEAKER: In the report — I think it's a very misleading term — in

Chapter 1 it says Mr. Gylander was seconded from the Department of Agriculture. I think that certainly is misleading. The feeling is that seconded means the department is paying the wages and allowing a committee to use that person's serv ices. Really, I think the Land Use Forum should have said, we hired him and he's on staff, period. So I'm not impressed with that. But that's a minor point. Our concern lies with the work that is going to be done in the coming year. As I recall, you listed six things for Dr. Wood to do. One is the assessment of the grazing rental and the dues. Now, Dr.

Wood has worked with that for many, many years, and I expect he could put that together in a couple of hours. Lease policy and procedure: he's worked all his life on that, and I expect he could put that together during a very short period of time. Checking the statutes for land use and overlap: that could be included in the same afternoon of work. Trespass legislation: there is a whole

chapter here and quite a long group of references that the committee has already studied and spent $600,000 on. Supposedly, they should have up-to-date infor mation and very accurate and good recommendations at this time. There's just no way I can buy that we need to have further study. If we do, the charge I lay is that this committee and these people have just not fulfilled their obligations at all. Their task was to present a final report. To say, now we have to study for a year more, spend over $80,000 to do it, is not right. I just can't buy this idea of spending a bunch more money on trespass legislation.

I think it's time for the politicians to make a judgment on it. If they can't, on [the basis of] the report, I think they should be critical of that committee. Fifthly, capital gains and unearned increment tax: that topic has been raised, the subject is here. To me, at this point, it's a political decision whether we implement it or not. To go on for further research and background just does not prove anything, as far as I'm concerned. May draft legislation: now that's a little different. But in order to do that, I think, the government has to place its position squarely in front of this Legislature.

Up to this point in the debate on the land-use study, we have not had any clear position. The Minister of Municipal Affairs has said, yes, I'm presenting the planning act. Well, this report didn't even have to exist to put the planning act in the House, because the department was doing the research and the minister had a number of ideas anyway. I'm not sure how much input this report has really given to the planning act, and only the Minister of Municipal Affairs can answer that question.

I am just not prepared to accept that we need to spend $88,000 at this point to run after rabbits we already know exist in this province. I am just not prepared to accept that. Mr. Chairman, it's unfortunate that the minister seems to be on the hook at the moment; other ministers are also responsible. But he just has to give us better reasons why we in this Legislature, as Albertans or taxpayers, have to dish out $88,000 more to have a group of people wandering around doing work that one — I'm not sure of Mr. Gylander's involvement, but I know Dr.

Wood has worked in these areas for years, and if he can't give us all the answers to those questions by next weekend, I'll be very disappointed. I feel he can. I have confidence in these employees, as the Minister of Transportation has. He says his regional people can do it. I know Dr. Wood can. MR. MOORE: Mr.

Chairman, just briefly: one of the things which is perhaps difficult for some members to understand is that when you take the time that was taken by the Land Use Forum and this government to study land use and land ownership throughout this province, and then submit a report — in the past I suppose there have been occasions when the report has been adopted without any public input. But surely it's a responsible attitude, having submitted that report, to take a few months to find out what Albertans think about it.

For example, in the area of trespass the report suggests we should allow people to trespass on private land, with the exception of areas that have growing crops or are near residences. Now, we've had an overwhelming degree of public opinion that says, we don't think much of that. Very simply, our position is that having tabled the report and provided it to Albertans — we're still sending out copies — we need to do considerably more study on what portions of the recommendations we might implement and how they might be implemented.

Frankly, having spent $600,000, I think it's the responsible thing to spend a little more to really conclude the item we are talking about. I recognize that the hon. member may have liked us to implement all the recommendations without that study. That's why you don't see very much coming forward in the spring session of the Legislature. We want to know what Albertans think about the report. During the course of the next several months, we hope to involve Dr. Wood and Mr. Gylander in that.

April 2, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 539 MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, I have no argument with the point the minister has made, that we want Albertans to be involved and to give an opinion. But over the last, I think, two years, we spent $600,000 with a team of some good people. I appreciated the meetings I attended, with regard to the Land Use Forum. I remember the young fellow who came to the meetings in Vulcan and said, look, everything you say at this meeting will be fed into the committee. That committee of three will hear all your reactions. They'll get your briefs. They'll take them into consid eration.

He said, one of the things is the concern about foreign land ownership. He said, this is mentioned in every forum. Well, when we look at this report, the concern of the people of the province really is not summarized in this report. It sort of glibly says, we have another survey that says we have a few people in Alberta who are concerned, or a very low percentage of foreigners are purchasing land. So we're going to forget the whole problem. But the input of people was not considered.

As I read this whole report, I get the feeling that the grass-roots level representations really were not the items of concern, that someone came back, decided to write the report, and put it together. This maybe is not a rational statement I'm going to make, but I sometimes get the feeling that someone with good writing and research ability could have been put in a room here with access to libraries and various other pieces of information, and put this report together without all this running around the country, to Europe, to the United States, and maybe it would have only cost us $30,000 or $40,000. MR.

MOORE: you're discrediting those individuals again. MR. R. SPEAKER: That's right. I am a bit disappointed in the report. There's no question about that. I felt it hasn't really had a look at reality in society. But in saying those things, Mr. Chairman, the point I'm attempting to make is, let's examine where we're going from now. If the minister can point out to us some very solid reasons why we should spend $88,000 more — man, I'm the first guy to support it. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, I would like to support the stand taken by my honorable friend Mr.

Speaker, in that we have to justify and we have to pass a budget where we're going to spend $80,000 or $90,000 for a reason I'm not convinced is legitimate. Mr. Chairman, the areas of concern expressed in the meetings I attended do not seem to have been taken very seriously, and do not show any prominence in this Land Use Forum report. That is the question of foreign ownership of land — I think the government had better wake up to the fact that it is a serious problem — and the matter of trespass on private property.

Now, in fairness to the honorable members of the Land Use Forum committee, with the years of knowledge they've had and the expertise they have, I would say to the hon. minister and to the hon. members who represent rural communities and rural constituencies that if there's ever any suggestion that this is going to be implemented, I would say they'd better not head out into the area 25 miles outside Edmonton, because I don't think they'd make it back. We consider private property very, very sacred. We consider it very sacred. [interjections] The hon. Member for Edmonton Belmont says, why would we not sell it?

Well, surely those two issues are a little bit different. Mr. Chairman, we are spending public money, and it's going to be $80,000 and $90,000. I think all the information we asked for — some of it is in this report. The decision that's going to have to be made is going to have to be a political government decision. The government better not keep waffling around. They had better start making some decisions. What they're really trying to do is buy six months of time at the expense of the taxpayer. They're waffling around and not wanting to make the decision, especially on foreign land buying. So, Mr.

Chairman, there's just no way I can vote for that appropriation. Agreed to: Appropriation 1.2.4 $134,914 Vote 1 Total Program $6,903,724 Appropriation 2.3 MR. MOORE: I think that was held, Mr. Chairman, pending some information with regard to personal service contracts and the other information I passed out this morning. Unless hon. members can recall some other reason, I believe that's what it was. DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, can the hon. minister indicate to us how the province does attempt to control brucellosis, what controls there are [on] cattle coming into the province?

Also, maybe the minister can indicate to us in this vote if he has any knowledge of the large number of Holstein cows that were brought in, I believe from Ontario, and were fed in the Vermilion and St. Paul areas. Can he give us some indication on this program? What eventually happened to these cattle, how were they financed: all the information he can give us on that matter. MR. MOORE: Mr. Chairman, I would probably be better equipped to provide detailed information on brucellosis if we were in [sub]committee and I had the director of veterinary services there.

But, basically speaking, I think hon. members know that animal health in Canada is largely controlled by the health of animals branch of Agriculture Canada, the reason, of course, being that it didn't seem, and still doesn't seem, appropriate to establish provincial boundaries through which, when animals pass, a variety of tests are required. You can understand the difficulty that might occur between Saskatchewan and Alberta, for example, if each province had its own complete set of animal health regulations that were separate and apart from anything the federal government might do.

It would leave you in a next to impossible position, at times, in moving cattle across a provincial boundary. So that's the very general, broad reason the Government of Canada — and the provinces, I think, have all agreed — should have the main say, if you want to put it that way, with respect to animal health, including

540 ALBERTA HANSARD April 2, 1976 brucellosis. In terms of brucellosis, there is one difficult problem we've been dealing with the federal govern ment on for some time. First of all, there are two different opinions with respect to how we might control brucellosis in Canada. Indeed, it's prevalent in other countries of the world too. There's the idea that a slaughter program is the only way to control the disease and completely eradicate it. On the other hand, there's a good degree of opinion that suggests we should continue and even increase the vaccination program.

Some of my honorable colleagues, and perhaps the Member for Clover Bar, might understand better than I do, but my information is that as long as you continue a vaccination program, you'll never completely eradicate the disease. So in Canada, we are still in a position of both vaccination and slaughter. We've had briefs from the dairy people particularly, suggesting that we should do away with vaccination and proceed on a slaughter program.

But the difficulty with a slaughter program is that compensation is paid by the Government of Canada, and it's paid on the basis of the carcass value of the animal for slaughter. Now when you get into the dairy business or get into exotic breeds of beef cattle or registered beef cattle, you come into a very difficult situation if your herd is condemned. If they are slaughtered, you only get paid market value.

We've been requesting of the federal government — indeed most breed organiza tions and the dairy industry have as well — that the payment for slaughter be upgraded to reflect the actual market value of the animal. We've continually had promises that that isn't too far away, and we hope that is so. Once that is accomplished, if we can get the Government of Canada to consider a level of payment that's close to market value, we would be in a much better position to say that we won't have vaccination, we'll have a slaughter program only.

The other thing I should indicate is that there is a lot of opinion that suggests that over the last couple of years brucellosis is on the increase in Alberta and Canada. We're not at all sure that's totally correct, in that there was a period when the testing, which is done by the federal health of animals branch, was not carried out to the extent it might have been. In other words, they slowed down on the testing.

So when a few instances began to appear, first in Ontario and later in other parts of the country, the testing was stepped up, resulting in an increase in the number of herds tested that had brucellosis. Whether the increase in the number of known herds with brucel losis is due entirely to an increase in the disease or — I suspect it's likely due to some increase in the disease, but also to some increase in our ability to identify it because of having stepped up the testing. I will go on to talk briefly about the Holstein dairy cattle situation . . . DR.

BUCK: At the same time we're talking about brucellosis, how about bluetongue? Is it a real problem in this province? MR. MOORE: Well, it really hasn't been, although recently the Government of Canada, again through its health of animals branch, put on some additional restrictions with respect to animals imported from the United States, because of a fear that the disease there was of a nature that it might get into Canada and be quite prevalent. We've had quite a large lobby from the United States breed organizations, and indeed from state governments there, suggesting the restrictions are far too tough.

Very recently the United Kingdom placed a restric tion on animals coming from Canada, because of the possibility of bluetongue being brought into that country. I'm not aware of the reasons that was done. I don't believe it was done because of any degree of information they had that bluetongue was prevalent in Canada. I think, however, that in countries like the U.K., or even Canada, where the disease has been very rare and very isolated, it's not too easy to be protective. In other words, just the very slightest chance would make a country move to take appropriate action.

That's been difficult for us with respect to the U.K. It means we're effectively banned from showing cattle in their livestock shows, and there's a very large one there that's important in the world context. But we have to live with those things when dealing with animal diseases. With respect to Holstein cattle, as hon. members know, many countries throughout the world are interested in importing Holstein cattle. Indeed, over the last few years large numbers of Holsteins went from Canada to various countries.

One of the difficul ties of people assembling Holstein calves and cattle in Alberta for shipment overseas is that at a given time of the year there's not a sufficient number of Holsteins of the type and grade available here to assemble large herds. So over the past two or three years, a number of firms have been importing Hols teins from Quebec and Ontario, where the dairy herds are very, very much larger than they are in Alberta, growing them out here, breeding them, testing them, and assembling them for shipment overseas.

In some respects, as long as they are utilizing calves from Alberta as much as they possibly can, I don't think that's bad at all. When we do have supplies of Holstein calves available for that market in Alberta, at least we will have the firms doing the work in this province, and our producers won't have to ship them to Ontario, Quebec, or the United States. The latest information is that in the underdeveloped countries, particularly those with huge energy resources, there appears to be a continuing and increasing demand for dairy cattle.

So the outlook in that regard is still quite good, although the efforts in some areas have not panned out as well as some exporters thought they would when they initially entered these projects during the last two or three years. Agreed to: Appropriation 2.3 $6,817,232 Vote 2 Total Program $26,788,538 Appropriation 4.2 MR. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the minister one question, related to the material he gave us today. It deals with the ADC advisory committees, that we find some of their expenses elsewhere in the department.

It seems to me that if we're funding the ADC by appropriating an amount of money to it, and we have these ADC advisory groups across the

April 2, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 541 province, the cleanest way to fund them is through the ADC also. There may be some reasons for not doing this. If there are, I'd certainly like to know about it. MR. MOORE: Yes, there is, Mr. Chairman. Previous to this year, the agricultural development committees were funded by the Agricultural Development Corpo ration. I asked that they be moved from that vote into the family farm services area, because our ag. devel opment committees do not deal just with Ag. Devel opment Corporation appeals.

Indeed, in the northern half of the province, the largest amount of work by ag. development committees has to do with disposition of public lands — homesteads, grazing reserves, tree- farm land and so on. In addition to that, we ask them from time to time to get involved and express their views in a good number of other areas that relate to agriculture in general. Indeed, I receive from ag. development committees a lot of resolutions about things that are really not related to our lending institution.

So in view of the fact that perhaps half of the total expenses involved in ag. development committee work applied to the corporation and half applied to other areas, I felt they would be more appropriately funded under the family farm services division. In addition to that, our family farm services division was always responsible for all the meetings, the work, the appointment of committee members, and so on that the ADC committees do. The corporation, in fact, had nothing to do with that. So they were moved just on the feeling that it was a better arrangement to have them within the department budget. DR.

BUCK: Mr. Chairman, to the hon. minister. I've had many farmers complain that the ADC is becoming quite hesitant about lending money for land. Now, I don't know if this is because foreign land buying has pushed the price up; or a combination of that, plus the fact that the farmer now has to pay capital gains, so he wants that covered when he goes to sell his land; or the fact that the former minister was lending so much money, and this inflated the price of land. But I do want to know, Mr. Chairman, if ADC loans to buy land are in fact becoming more difficult to obtain, as farmers' representations to me claim.

MR. MOORE: Well, Mr. Chairman, the most recent problems have been with regard to the fact that the Farm Credit Corporation effectively ran out of money some months ago. It wasn't until yesterday or today that they were able to get some new and additional funds for the current fiscal year. I'm not aware of exactly what the extent of Farm Credit Corporation lending will be in this fiscal year, but it will be cut considerably from last year. In the Ag. Development Corporation, we've always worked as a lender of last resort.

You first go to the Farm Credit Corporation or other lending institutions to see if you can get funds there. Unfortunately, in recent months we've had people who have gone to FCC. Because it is out of money, they've come to the Ag. Development Corporation for loans. Many of them are additions to family farm units that in the mind of the corporation are already viable units. They're only adding to their holdings and don't really require it to make a good family farm unit. They've been turned down.

They can get the funds from chartered banks, treasury branches, credit unions, the Industrial Development Bank, or somewhere else. So it is true that we've been getting a greater number of requests for loans to buy land, and we've been turning down a little greater percentage than we used to. But it's mostly because of the lack of funds in the FCC. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, just with regard to the FCC, I understand that their budget allotment is practically spent by the end of today. I know their commitments were quite extensive. My question is two things, I guess.

One, basically how does that affect the ADC policy in the coming year? Two, what kind of discussions will you have on that? MR. MOORE: Well, I don't know yet, Mr. Chairman. Earlier this morning I spoke to the chairman of the board of the Ag. Development Corporation and asked him if he had been able to find out, since yesterday, the extent of FCC funds available for lending over and above what they've committed, and he hasn't. He hopes that he will know by mid-April.

At that time, I'll be able to sit down with the corporation board of directors to get some idea of what kind of pressure that is going to put on the Agricultural Development Corporation and what kind of funds we might be asked for during the coming fiscal year. It's my understanding that the federal government feels that some cutback in funds is necessary to dampen the inflationary trend in farmland prices. It may well be that is an acceptable position.

Indeed, you don't have to be that financially knowledgeable to know that if there are all kinds of credit at reasonable interest rates, land prices are going to keep going up. One of the other things we're involved in in ADC, of course, is an assessment of the ability of a particular piece of land or farm to return an income to the individual.

As land prices increase, particularly if it's a loan with only 15 or 20 per cent equity, we do find more and more where we look at it and say, that particular unit, in our view, just cannot pay a return which would provide a living for this family and at the same time repay the loan that's being asked for. I think it's only right that we turn those down, and we have to use some judgment in doing it. Surely we don't want to put people into a financial hole they can never get out of. So loans are turned down for that reason as well. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Chairman, could the minister make a policy statement or a sort of intent at this time, with regard to a circumstance where ADC gets to a point where loans, grants, or guarantees have depleted or nearly depleted our resources? Will the minister, at that point, be very firm with regard to holding the line on guarantees? Often that can be one of the outlets. If you can't borrow the money directly, you go to the guarantee program and expand that, because it's a little easier avenue. What's the policy opinion at this time with regard to that?

542 ALBERTA HANSARD April 2, 1976 MR. MOORE: Really, it doesn't require any more policy than we have now, because the programs are separate. We generally try to reserve the direct lending funds, which usually are lent over a period of 30 years, for land purchases. We almost never provide guaranteed money for land purchases, because the extent for which a guaranteed loan can be obtained is usually 10 years. The chartered banks will not generally lend for more than a 10-year period. So our guaranteed loans are reserved for equipment purchases, livestock purchases, operating capital, and that kind of thing.

If, in fact, we are out of funds because of lack of FCC money and pressure on the corporation for direct money for land purchases, it would be the rare case where guarantees are issued for that purpose. They might be, if it could be shown that the individual had enough equity that he could make the repayment over a 10-year period. But as you can appreciate, depend ing on the price of the land and so on, that would take a fair amount of equity. So I don't anticipate the problem, except with respect to saying that when our funds are depleted for direct loans, no more money is available.

The hon. member can well recall the old Alberta Farm Purchase Board worked that way. Usually, if you were in there in January, you were okay. But if you came in February, there were no more funds for that municipality. So that's the way it would be. MR. R. SPEAKER: I think the minister has clarified for me that, in line with a policy of restraint, once the money we vote on here for direct lending is gone, expansionary measures won't be taken, and special warrants issued, to take care of further direct loans. Is that a cabinet decision?

Is that a government decision at this point, that we have a firm position on that? Or is it still flexible, and we can play it by ear later on? MR. MOORE: First of all, the funds for direct lending don't come via the agriculture appropriation or by special warrants. They come as advances from Treasury, on which ADC pays interest on the amount over $50 million. Last December the act was amended to allow the Ag. Development Corporation to have a maximum of $150 million in its revolving fund. It doesn't require us to come to the Legislature and say we need more funds, until we reach that statutory limit.

As I said last December, when we amended that act, I would hope $150 million would be sufficient funds to last us until about the end of 1977. So I don't anticipate running out of funds during this fiscal year. MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr. Chairman, just what is the policy of the ADC in relation to a father and son when the son wants to break away from the father's operation and start an operation of his own? The father does have a considerable amount of equity, but the son wants to start on his own, and the father is willing to help him get started. Are they turning these loans down? MR.

MOORE: Well, the most general situation we're faced with in ADC is where the son wants to start a farming operation on his own, or wants to expand a family operation. He applies to ADC for a loan, and in fact no support is given by the father. We've taken the position that a certain amount of equity, in terms of land being mortgaged to the corporation, or something, must be provided by the father in father- son relationships. That's not an easy one. I've discussed the matter a number of times with the board of directors. It's not an easy one to deal with.

We felt that surely, if the Government of Alberta was going to establish a Crown corporation for direct loans of the kind of dollars we are lending, fathers indeed had some responsibility, where there was financial capability, to assist that son or daughter in getting started in a farming operation too. There are no clear-cut rules in that regard. We look at each individual application on its own merits. But we do turn some down, where a father of considerable financial ability does not want, in any way, to assist a son who is generally buying part of his land.

We look at the situation in relation to what that father and mother may require in terms of financial capital if they're moving off the land to buy a house in the city or whatever else they want to do. Indeed, we get pretty upset when they want the entire amount in cash from the corporation, and they're going to buy Canada Savings Bonds with it. We think they probably have some obligation to help that son or daughter enter the occupation of farming. MR. MANDEVILLE: Mr.

Chairman, I'm thinking of a son who branches out and wants to purchase a piece of land on his own, and the father agrees to help him with the working agreement as far as operating capital, equipment, and so on is concerned. This is the type of loan I'm thinking of. The father does have a good equity in his farming operation, but the son wants to start on his own, and the father does agree to help him with operating capital, machinery, and any working agreement. MR. MOORE: Mr. Chairman, it would be very difficult for me to answer that question. As I said, we evaluate each on its own merits.

Indeed, the ability of the young person to run a farming operation, his desire, his education, his experience, and a lot of other things come into play. So they have to be dealt with on an individual basis. I just couldn't answer it in a general way. One of the unique things about the Agricultural Development Corporation that I don't want to change is that they don't have a list of 20 pages of rules, where you go down and check off the points one way or the other and say, you either qualify or you don't.

That's important, because in dealing with loans to young people going into farming in particular, you're dealing with individuals. They're all different. If you outline a whole set of rules and regulations, you'll find you're turning down loans for people who should have them, and approving loans for people who sometimes shouldn't have them. The policy is pretty general and pretty broad, and we leave the matter to the board of directors of the corporation, on appeal, to determine whether in fact a loan is made.

They're provided with a significant amount of information by the loans officers and the staff of the corporation.

April 2, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 543 DR. BUCK: Mr. Chairman, just one short question to the hon. minister. Maybe they don't have 20 pages of rules and regulations, but they have 20 pages of forms for the poor farmer to go through when he makes the application. So that solves that problem about the 20 pages of rules. The question I have is just the exact opposite to that of the hon. Member for Bow Valley. It's where the son wants to go on his own and the father says, well, I've got my farm and I have the equity in it. I'm not going to co-sign for his new farm. If he wants to go broke, let ADC worry about that.

So it's just the exact opposite to what my colleague says. I just want to know if there are any rules and regulations for that. MR. MOORE: Mr. Chairman, on many occasions when the father takes the attitude that the son can go broke or not go broke and the ADC can worry about it, we say: well, we'd like you to worry about it a little bit, too . . . DR. BUCK: What if he's on his own? MR. MOORE: . . . and back him in a financial way. Indeed, we say the same thing to people who are in other businesses and have sons or daughters who want to go farming.

To have it any other way and completely wide open in terms of financing would, from time to time, leave us in a position of funding close to 100 per cent of loans to go into farming. It would leave us in the position of having to say, as we did under the old Alberta Farm Purchase Board, that we've only got enough money for one month of the year; the other 11 months you can go without. AN HON. MEMBER: You can't have it both ways. MR. PURDY: Mr.

Chairman, I wonder if the minister could indicate how much of the $150 million that's now out in a direct lending program is expected to flow back into the ADC, say, in 1976. MR. MOORE: In ADC, income is derived in a variety of ways. They charge 1 per cent with respect to the guaranteeing of loans, so they receive income from that. It runs in my mind, without having figures in front of me, Mr. Chairman, that in this fiscal year we would expect to receive somewhere in the neighbor hood of $6 million to $7 million on loan repayments. But that's not on an outstanding amount of $150 million.

At the end of December 1975, we had about $100 million outstanding on our revolving fund. As well, you have to appreciate that, being that the corporation is only three years old, the 30-year loans that were made — many of them particularly to beginning farmers and so on — require only interest payments the first year or two. So we're in a situation where we're not yet getting the kind of return that might be expected, because of the deferment of principal payments in new loans. But it's somewhere in the neighborhood of $6 million to $7 million this fiscal year. MR. TAYLOR: Mr.

Chairman, my question is pretty well along the line of that of the hon. Member for Stony Plain. I'd like to go a little bit further in that regard. Have there been any cases where the purchaser has been able to complete his payment, through some good fortune or other, even though it's a very short period of time? If that is done, is he still required to pay the interest that would have accrued in the period over which that loan is amortized? That is the first point I'd like to get clear on.

The second point follows [from] the question by the hon. member from Fort Saskatchewan, who men tioned there was a pile of applications. My experience with the Agricultural Development Corpo ration indicates it's a very efficient body. But I wouldn't be alarmed if they're not able to deal with all the applications. As a matter of fact, I'd like to see their book jammed with applications that we're not able to fulfil financially. I don't adhere to the theory that we have enough farmers and enough production in this country.

I go the other way, that we need more production, more people on the land, and better use of the land we have. I hope that is also the theory of the Agricultural Development Corporation. I think it is. While I'm on my feet, the other point I'd like to ask about is, have any loans been granted to the Hutterian Brethren or other community-type farms? I don't think this is so. But I was told by a person in the province that some loans had been made to people who were not residents of Alberta. I advised him that I didn't think this was possible under the act, but that I would check with the minister.

Have any loans been made to people who are not residents of this province? MR. MOORE: Mr. Chairman, very briefly, I'm simply not aware whether any loans have been made to Hutterian Brethren. On your first question, there is no interest penalty if an individual wants to repay his principal before the due date. He pays only the interest owing to that point. As far as non-residents are concerned, the act itself does not stipulate, but the regulations are now in the process of being amended to define a resident of Alberta and to ensure that direct loans are not made to non-residents.

We have one difficulty there, in that we didn't want to leave ourselves in a position of not being able to guarantee loans to companies that might have some non-resident share capital in them. A good many of our Alberta companies are in that position. Generally speaking, the situation will be that no loans are made to anyone unless they are a resident of Alberta, and I believe a resident will be defined somewhere along the lines of a person who has resided continuously in the province for six months of the last two years, or something of that nature. DR. HORNER: Mr.

Chairman, having regard to other activities, I move the committee rise and report. [Motion carried] [Dr. McCrimmon left the Chair] [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] DR. McCRIMMON: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has had under consideration certain resolu

544 ALBERTA HANSARD April 2, 1976 tions, begs to report progress, and asks leave to sit again. MR. SPEAKER: Having heard the report and the request for leave to sit again, do you all agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. Tributes to Clerk of the Assembly DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to take this opportunity, on behalf of the government and indeed the government members of the Legislature, to pay a tribute to our retiring Clerk. Having worked with him for a period of nine years on both sides of the House, it's perhaps appropriate that I get the opportunity to pay that tribute.

Certainly, I must say that Bill has been, as described before, a friend to all members of the Legislature. He truly understood the meaning of a Legislature and that each individual member had certain rights and obligations. He wasn't hesitant to point those out when he needed to. I can recall having worked with other clerks in other Legislatures. I have been really impressed with the kind of job Bill MacDonald has been able to do in Alberta. Our Legislature is sometimes referred to as one of the quieter ones. I think Bill even referred to it as that. Mr.

Speaker, he has to take part of the responsibility for that. I think the way he approached his job and the advice he gave to individual members have made this House much more decorous than some other Legislatures. I think Bill can take some pride in the fact that we can do our business in the Alberta Legislature with that kind of decorum, yet have firm and strong debate at the same time. So Bill, on behalf of all of us on this side, and on behalf of the Premier particularly, we want to wish you well. We encourage you to come back to visit as often as you can.

We'll try to make sure the Department of Recreation, Parks and Wildlife stocks some of those lakes and streams so you can come back and do some fishing. From all of us, the very, very best in the future. [applause] MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, and to you, Bill Mac Donald, on behalf of myself and my colleagues in the official opposition, might I say that, as you recognize, it isn't always that the Deputy Premier and I agree. But on this occasion, I can say that I whole-heartedly agree with the Deputy Premier. That may be some sort of red-letter day. It's not a red-letter day, though, in that Bill MacDonald is leaving.

It's a rather regrettable day. I can recall when Bill's predecessor, Ray Crevolin, passed away. The search went on to select a Clerk of the Legislative Assembly. I'd have to say I had the opportunity of knowing Bill in the Department of Lands and Forests before he took on this job of Clerk of the Assembly. He was responsible for a certain publication that came out of the Department of Lands and Forests. Perhaps that's where he gets that fishing and hunting expertise the Deputy Premier talked of. I would have to say that I think I can also recall the day when Mr. MacDonald first rose in the Assembly.

If I might be so frank, Bill, as to say, you commenced the daily routine in a very squeaky and high voice. It didn't take Bill MacDonald very long to develop a strong, firm voice. But perhaps more important than that strong, firm voice, he developed an appreciation for the role of individual members of the Assembly. I also say that as a result of sitting on both sides of the House.

I think if there's one tradition Bill MacDonald has enhanced a great deal in this Assembly, it's a real, genuine, and lasting concern for the role, responsibil ity, and hopefully the self-respect for individual members of this Assembly, regardless of where those members sit. As a result of that kind of concern, that real, genuine appreciation of what democracy is all about, this Legislature is a better place — and more important, a stronger place — because Bill MacDonald has filled his shoes very ably while being the Clerk of this Assembly. [applause] MR. TAYLOR: Mr.

Speaker, I too would like to add my tribute to Bill. Perhaps someone would say, for whom are you speaking? I'm speaking for my caucus. [laughter] It makes me think of a story I heard years ago. There was a vast throng of people. The Catholic priest came out and said, all the Catholics come with me. The United Church minister said, all the United people come with me. The Baptist said, all those come with me. The Salvation Army captain got up and said, all those who don't belong to anybody, come with me. You know, the captain had the largest crowd of the whole works.

So I think I too am speaking for a very large crowd of people in the province. I'm a little surprised at seeing Bill retire, because he hasn't shown any of the signs of retirement. In the first place, when a person gets close to retirement, he chases girls downhill only. I haven't seen any signs of that. When you're getting close to retirement, that's the time when the girls in the office confide in you. I don't know whether that's so or not. There are three characteristics of people when they get to retirement age. The first one is loss of memory.

And for the life of me, I can't remember the other two. [laughter] But I haven't seen any signs of loss of memory on the part of Bill. I regret very much that Bill is leaving us. During my lifetime in the Legislature, I've served under three very wonderful people who have been Clerks. The first was Bob Andison, a remarkable man, a wonderful man. He was followed for a few years by Ray Crevolin, a young man but a very fine type, a man of high principles. Then came Bill MacDonald. Bill followed in the tradition of both Bob Andison and the late Ray Crevolin.

I want to thank Bill for the many courtesies he's extended to me throughout the years. He's gone out of his way many, many times to help in difficult circumstances. I appreciate that very, very much indeed. Most of all, I'd like to thank Bill for what he's done for democracy and parliamentary representation, the thing in which we all believe. He has made this a living thing, a real thing, and not just a theory. He's practised the highest traditions of representative government, and I appreciate that very, very much. On behalf of the vast throng of

April 2, 1976 ALBERTA HANSARD 545 people who know Bill, I would like to say that I hope he'll be with us for many, many years, in order that he can enjoy the many good things he helped to build in this province. [applause] MR. SPEAKER: Before calling on Mr. MacDonald, if I may, to conclude the debate, I think it is appropriate that he handle one more tabling before he leaves his chair as the Clerk of this Assembly. I haven't a duplicate, but I would like to table with Mr. Mac- Donald the tribute to him which all hon. members have signed in expression of their appreciation for his service in the Assembly.

If I might be permitted, I would like to add my own word of thanks. I recall, when a certain suspicion had arisen that I might become the Speaker of this Assembly, having gone posthaste with my colleague, the Member for Edmonton Beverly, to Mr. MacDonald for guidance and assistance, and it was generously and very effectively given. I have had many occasions since then to be grateful for that guidance and assistance. If I might mention one more thing, I think it's a particularly happy development that we were able to achieve the excellent new format of the Alberta Hansard before Mr.

MacDonald completed his tenure of office. I think it's particularly fitting, because he had such a great deal to do with the achieving of that format, working together with the Hansard Editor, Elizabeth Bishop. I was particularly happy to see that not only was the work completed, but the improved Hansard actually appeared before Mr. MacDonald had to leave office. In expressing my own farewell to him, subject, of course, to hoping to see him quite often in this Assembly, I would like to pay my sincere respect to Mr.

MacDonald for the way he has served the highest court in the province, the place in which the people of Alberta, as a sovereign unit under the constitution, make their laws. [applause] MR. MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Deputy Pre mier, Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Taylor, I hope Beauchesne isn't watching. We're establishing a rather unfortunate precedent, I think. When the day comes that Clerks get up to babble to members, the members are in real trouble. At a very fine luncheon the other day, you afforded me a splendid opportunity to reminisce with you, and I thank you for that.

I have one or two other things I'd like to thank you for. As I know the government members in particular have some rather pressing business in the city of Calgary, I'll only take a moment of your time. I'm particularly gratified to notice that in the gallery my staff has come to support me, accompanied by my wife, Joan. There are other friends above as well. First of all, I want to thank you for all the really unwarranted tributes you've paid me — the kind comments presented both personally and collectively — and I want you to know that I do appreciate them greatly.

I would like to thank you for one or two other rather obscure things. There has been a lot of talk about the experience Bill MacDonald gives to members when they come in. This aging, gray-haired man who still does chase ladies uphill, Gordon — one in particular — may have been able to provide to people from experience. But on the other hand, those of us who rely on experience alone, and think it's the end of everything, miss a great deal.

From new members coming to the House and young people coming to the building, working with a new government, and in fact, many young ones who came with the former government, the Clerk learned a great deal. It is a poor man, I believe, who doesn't learn from the people who come along with new ideas, disposing of the stagnation an older and experienced person often falls into. On this note, I want to pay all the admiration I can think of to Gerry Amerongen. Gerry has been patient with me.

With my stubborn experience and Gerry's ability to discern what is necessary, what is good service, and things like that for this House, I think perhaps I might be permitted to say that together we have probably the most responsible Assembly in Canada. I know I don't need to tell you that in Gerry Amerongen you have a Speaker you can be proud of and a Speaker who is looked upon with considerable regard, growing every day across Canada. I personally and publicly want to thank you, Gerry, and wish you the very best. No administrator ever succeeds, even in a modest way, without the help of good staff.

To those of my staff who are assembled in the gallery, those who have been here before with me — and there have been several of them — Clerk Assistants, both present and past, I wish to acknowledge with gratitude their support, their help, and, at times, a shoulder on which to cry. I don't think I should say any more. I wish you all the best of luck. I hope this Legislative Assembly continues to present the kind of responsible face it always has, and upon which Dr. Horner commented. If I've had a small

part in bringing that kind of picture to the people of Alberta, I am extraordinarily grateful for having had the opportunity. Good-bye and good luck. [standing ovation] MR. FOSTER: Mr. Speaker, I move we call it 1 o'clock. MR. SPEAKER: Having heard the motion by the hon. Acting Government House Leader, do you all agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. SPEAKER: The Assembly stands adjourned until Monday afternoon at half past two. [The House rose at 12:15 p.m.]

546 ALBERTA HANSARD April 2, 1976

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19760402
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L18 S2 19760402 1000 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	6760c39c8f0fe92a2e7463e84efd8b55f996663c

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