Province of Alberta The 27th Legislature Fourth Session Alberta Hansard Thursday, November 24, 2011 Issue 40a The Honourable Kenneth R. Kowalski, Speaker

Legislative Assembly of Alberta The 27th Legislature Fourth Session Kowalski, Hon. Ken, Barrhead-Morinville-Westlock, Speaker Cao, Wayne C.N., Calgary-Fort, Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees Zwozdesky, Gene, Edmonton-Mill Creek, Deputy Chair of Committees Ady, Hon. Cindy, Calgary-Shaw (PC) Allred, Ken, St. Albert (PC) Amery, Moe, Calgary-East (PC) Anderson, Rob, Airdrie-Chestermere (W), Wildrose Opposition House Leader Benito, Carl, Edmonton-Mill Woods (PC) Berger, Evan, Livingstone-Macleod (PC) Bhardwaj, Naresh, Edmonton-Ellerslie (PC) Bhullar, Manmeet Singh, Calgary-Montrose (PC) Blackett, Hon.

Lindsay, Calgary-North West (PC) Blakeman, Laurie, Edmonton-Centre (AL), Official Opposition House Leader Boutilier, Guy C., Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo (

W) Brown, Dr. Neil, QC, Calgary-Nose Hill (PC) Calahasen, Pearl, Lesser Slave Lake (PC) Campbell, Robin, West Yellowhead (PC), Government Whip Chase, Harry B., Calgary-Varsity (AL) Dallas, Hon. Cal, Red Deer-South (PC) Danyluk, Hon. Ray, Lac La Biche-St. Paul (PC) DeLong, Alana, Calgary-Bow (PC) Denis, Hon. Jonathan, QC, Calgary-Egmont (PC), Deputy Government House Leader Doerksen, Arno, Strathmore-Brooks (PC) Drysdale, Wayne, Grande Prairie-Wapiti (PC), Deputy Government Whip Elniski, Doug, Edmonton-Calder (PC) Evans, Hon.

Iris, Sherwood Park (PC) Fawcett, Kyle, Calgary-North Hill (PC) Forsyth, Heather, Calgary-Fish Creek (W), Wildrose Opposition Whip Fritz, Hon. Yvonne, Calgary-Cross (PC) Goudreau, Hon. Hector G., Dunvegan-Central Peace (PC) Griffiths, Doug, Battle River-Wainwright (PC) Groeneveld, George, Highwood (PC) Hancock, Hon. Dave, QC, Edmonton-Whitemud (PC), Government House Leader Hayden, Hon. Jack, Drumheller-Stettler (PC) Hehr, Kent, Calgary-Buffalo (AL), Official Opposition Deputy Leader Hinman, Paul, Calgary-Glenmore (W), Wildrose Opposition Deputy Leader Horne, Fred, Edmonton-Rutherford (PC) Horner, Hon.

Doug, Spruce Grove-Sturgeon-St. Albert (PC) Jablonski, Hon. Mary Anne, Red Deer-North (PC) Jacobs, Broyce, Cardston-Taber-Warner (PC) Johnson, Jeff, Athabasca-Redwater (PC) Johnston, Art, Calgary-Hays (PC) Kang, Darshan S., Calgary-McCall (AL), Official Opposition Whip Klimchuk, Hon. Heather, Edmonton-Glenora (PC) Knight, Hon. Mel, Grande Prairie-Smoky (PC) Leskiw, Genia, Bonnyville-Cold Lake (PC) Liepert, Hon. Ron, Calgary-West (PC) Lindsay, Fred, Stony Plain (PC) Lukaszuk, Hon.

Thomas A., Edmonton-Castle Downs (PC) Deputy Government House Leader Lund, Ty, Rocky Mountain House (PC) MacDonald, Hugh, Edmonton-Gold Bar (AL) Marz, Richard, Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills (PC) Mason, Brian, Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood (ND), Leader of the ND Opposition McFarland, Barry, Little Bow (PC) McQueen, Diana, Drayton Valley-Calmar (PC) Mitzel, Len, Cypress-Medicine Hat (PC) Morton, F.L., Foothills-Rocky View (PC) Notley, Rachel, Edmonton-Strathcona (ND), ND Opposition House Leader Oberle, Hon. Frank, Peace River (PC) Olson, Hon.

Verlyn, QC, Wetaskiwin-Camrose (PC), Deputy Government House Leader Ouellette, Hon. Luke, Innisfail-Sylvan Lake (PC) Pastoor, Bridget Brennan, Lethbridge-East (PC) Prins, Ray, Lacombe-Ponoka (PC) Quest, Dave, Strathcona (PC) Redford, Alison M., QC, Calgary-Elbow (PC), Premier Renner, Rob, Medicine Hat (PC) Rodney, Dave, Calgary-Lougheed (PC) Rogers, George, Leduc-Beaumont-Devon (PC) Sandhu, Peter, Edmonton-Manning (PC) Sarich, Janice, Edmonton-Decore (PC) Sherman, Dr. Raj, Edmonton-Meadowlark (AL), Leader of the Official Opposition Snelgrove, Hon. Lloyd, Vermilion-Lloydminster (PC) Stelmach, Hon.

Ed, Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville (PC) Swann, Dr. David, Calgary-Mountain View (AL) Taft, Dr. Kevin, Edmonton-Riverview (AL), Official Opposition Deputy Whip Tarchuk, Janis, Banff-Cochrane (PC) Taylor, Dave, Calgary-Currie (AB) VanderBurg, George, Whitecourt-Ste. Anne (PC) Vandermeer, Tony, Edmonton-Beverly-Clareview (PC) Weadick, Hon. Greg, Lethbridge-West (PC) Webber, Hon. Len, Calgary-Foothills (PC) Woo-Paw, Teresa, Calgary-Mackay (PC) Xiao, David H., Edmonton-McClung (PC) Officers and Officials of the Legislative Assembly Clerk W.J. David McNeil Law Clerk/Director of Interparliamentary Relations Robert H.

Reynolds, QC Senior Parliamentary Counsel/ Director of House Services Shannon Dean Parliamentary Counsel Stephanie LeBlanc Committee Research Co-ordinator Philip Massolin Sergeant-at-Arms Brian G. Hodgson Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms Chris Caughell Assistant Sergeant-at-Arms Gordon H. Munk Managing Editor of Alberta Hansard Liz Sim Party standings: Progressive Conservative: 68 Alberta Liberal: 8 Wildrose Alliance: 4 New Democrat: 2 Alberta: 1

Executive Council Alison Redford Premier, President of Executive Council, Chair of Agenda and Priorities Committee Doug Horner Deputy Premier, President of Treasury Board and Enterprise Dave Hancock Minister of Human Services Ted Morton Minister of Energy Verlyn Olson Minister of Justice and Attorney General Fred Horne Minister of Health and Wellness Ron Liepert Minister of Finance Thomas Lukaszuk Minister of Educatio n, Political Minister for Edmonton Diana McQueen Minister of Environment and Water Jonathan Denis Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security Cal Dallas Minister of Intergovernmental, International and Aboriginal Relations, Political Minister for Central Alberta Evan Berger Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Political Minister for Southern Alberta Frank Oberle Minister of Sustainable Resource Development George VanderBurg Minister of Seniors Ray Danyluk Minister of Transportation Jeff Johnson Minister of Infrastructure, Political Minister for Northern Alberta Doug Griffiths Minister of Municipal Affairs Greg Weadick Minister of Advanced Education and Technology Jack Hayden Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation Heather Klimchuk Minister of Cu lture and Community Services Manmeet Singh Bhullar Minister of Service Alberta, Political Minister for Calgary Parliamentary Assistants Naresh Bhardwaj Health and Wellness Alana DeLong Seniors Arno Doerksen Human Services Kyle Fawcett Treasury Board and Enterprise Art Johnston Executive Council Barry McFarland Agriculture and Rural Development Len Mitzel Transportation Dave Rodney Sustainable Resource Development Janice Sarich Education David Xiao Energy

STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Standing Committee on the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund Chair: Ms Tarchuk Deputy Chair: Mr. Elniski Anderson DeLong Groeneveld Johnston MacDonald Quest Taft Standing Committee on Community Development Chair: Mrs. Jablonski Deputy Chair: Mr. Chase Amery Blakeman Boutilier Calahasen Goudreau Groeneveld Lindsay Snelgrove Taylor Vandermeer Standing Committee on Education Chair: Mr. Zwozdesky Deputy Chair: Mr. Hehr Anderson Benito Brown Cao Chase Leskiw Marz Notley Sarich Tarchuk Standing Committee on Energy Chair: Mrs.

Ady Deputy Chair: Ms Blakeman Hehr Hinman Jacobs Johnston Lund Mason McFarland Rodney Webber Xiao Standing Committee on Finance Chair: Mr. Renner Deputy Chair: Mr. Kang Allred Anderson Drysdale Fawcett Knight Mitzel Prins Sandhu Taft Taylor Standing Committee on Legislative Offices Chair: Mr. Blackett Deputy Chair: Mr. Lund Blakeman Brown Evans Hinman Lindsay MacDonald Marz Notley Ouellette Quest Special Standing Committee on Members’ Services Chair: Mr. Kowalski Deputy Chair: Mr. Campbell Amery Anderson Elniski Evans Hehr Knight Leskiw Mason Pastoor Rogers Standing Committee on Private Bills Chair: Dr.

Brown Deputy Chair: Ms Woo-Paw Allred Benito Boutilier Calahasen Doerksen Drysdale Evans Groeneveld Hinman Jacobs Kang Knight Lindsay McFarland Sandhu Sarich Snelgrove Swann Xiao Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections, Standing Orders and Printing Chair: Mr. Prins Deputy Chair: Mr. Snelgrove Amery Boutilier Brown Calahasen DeLong Doerksen Forsyth Jacobs Knight Leskiw McFarland Mitzel Notley Pastoor Quest Stelmach Swann Tarchuk Taylor Standing Committee on Public Accounts Chair: Mr. MacDonald Deputy Chair: Mr.

Goudreau Allred Benito Calahasen Chase Elniski Fawcett Forsyth Groeneveld Kang Mason Rodney Sandhu Vandermeer Woo-Paw Xiao Standing Committee on Public Health and Safety Chair: Mrs. Fritz Deputy Chair: Ms Pastoor Bhardwaj Blackett DeLong Doerksen Forsyth Notley Ouellette Rogers Swann Woo-Paw Select Special Information and Privacy Commissioner Search Committee Chair: Mr. Mitzel Deputy Chair: Mr. Lund Blakeman Hinman Lindsay Marz Notley Quest Rogers

November 24, 2011 Alberta Hansard 1355 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Thursday, November 24, 2011 1:30 p.m. 1:30 p.m. Thursday, November 24, 2011 [The Speaker in the chair] head: Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Welcome. Let us pray. As we conclude for this week our work in this Assembly, we renew our energies with thanks so that we may con- tinue our work with the people in the constituencies we represent. Amen. Please be seated. head: Introduction of Guests The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Premier. Mr. Horner: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is truly an honour for me to rise and introduce to you and through you another great group of grade 6 students from Woodhaven middle school in Spruce Grove. As you will recall, I introduced two classes yesterday of great, energetic kids and was able to have my picture taken with them in the rotunda and talk to them for a little while. The future is indeed bright in this province not only because of where we’re going and our economy but also because of these kids. They are accompanied by teachers Mrs. Miranda Niebergall, Mrs. Lindsay Imeson, Mr. Robert Coulas, and Mrs. Helen Kinnie and parent helper Mrs.

Connie Hendry. I believe they may be in both the public gallery and the members’ gallery. Whichever ones they are in, I would ask that they now rise and receive the tradi - tional warm welcome of this Legislature. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Culture and Community Services. Mrs. Klimchuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly a group of very bright individuals who are visiting the Alberta Legislature from my constituency.

With us today we have 21 ESL students from NorQuest College west, who are seated, I believe, in the members’ gallery. They are accompanied by their instructors: Ms Judy Carter, Ms Lesli Nessim, and Ms Debbie Stephen. As I’ve said many times before, I think it’s so important for Albertans to visit the Legislature, especially new Albertans. I would ask them all to rise so that my colle agues may join me in giving them a warm welcome to the Alberta Legislature today. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Strathcona. Mr. Quest: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the hon.

Member for Sherwood Park it’s my pleasure to rise before you in this Assembly today and introduce to you and through you a group of 54 outstanding grade 6 students from École Our Lady of Perpetual Help Catholic school in Sherwood Park. This is the last stop on their tour of the Legislature today, and I hope they’ve enjoyed their visit. These bright and energetic students are accompanied by their teachers, Sinead Doherty and Marc St. Jean, and parent volunteers Karen Gilbertson, Collette Bird, Tianda Ogilvie, Roxanne Popowich, and Melanie Martinez.

They’re seated in the members’ gallery, and I’d ask that they please rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Infrastructure. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise and introduce to you and through you to members of this Assembly two very special people from Fort McMurray.

Many of us know very well Iris Kirschner, the president of our PC association up there, who’s also very involved in the community and is a member of the local health advisory council, and her husband, our good friend Dave Kirschner, who is also a member of the Northern Alberta Development Council and has done a lot of great work for this province. They’re in the Assembly today, and I’d ask them to please rise and accept the traditional warm welcome. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Fort. Mr. Cao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s my great pleasure today to introduce to you and through you to all members of the Assembly students from the Faculty of Law at the University of Alberta who are enrolled in the course on legislative process and legislative planning taught by the Law Clerk, Rob Reynolds, and the Chief Legislative Counsel, Peter Pagano. I have a strong feeling that some of them will one day become politicians and sit in this Chamber. They are seated in the public gallery, and I would ask them to rise and receive the warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Grande Prairie-Wapiti. Mr.

Drysdale: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is indeed an honour and a pleasure for me to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembl y a hard -working delegation from the municipal district of Greenview. They’ve been in the city all week attending the AAMD and C convention, and they stopped by to see the Legislature in action. I’d ask them to stand as I call their names: Reeve Janis Simp kins, Councillor Bill Harder, and Coun- cillor George Delorme. I’d ask that we give them the warm welcome of this Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder. Mr. Elniski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have two introductions today. I would like to introduce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly the star member of the team who on Saturday past collaborated on the removal on my moustache as part of the Movember prostate cancer fundraising event. I’ll talk more about this experience in a moment, but for now I would like to introduce Jamie Johner, a grade 7 student at Mary Butterworth school, who eagerly undertook the task of shaving my fledging moustache under the supervision of a crowd of curlers that, of course, included her mom, public school board trustee Mrs. Cheryl Johner.

Jamie and her mom are seated in the public gallery, and I would ask them both to rise now and receive the traditional warm greeting of the Assembly. My second introduction, Mr. Speaker, is the woman who shortly after we met told me I would be much happier if I shaved the moustache I had been growing since I was 18. This is the same woman who thought it was a great idea for Jamie to shave off the one I grew for Movember: my lovely wife, Barb Grodaes. Honey, please rise and receive the traditional warm greeting of the Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: Everything else is still in place? [laughter] The hon.

Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Ms Notley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I am very pleased to introduce to you and through you to this Assembly my guests from the Indo- Canadian Women’s Association. The Indo- Canadian

1356 Alberta Hansard November 24, 2011 Women’s Association’s mission is to encourage and promote participation by new Canadians in social, economic, and political life in Canada. They’re here today to help draw attention to International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, which is tomorrow, and to remind us that gender-based violence is still a widespread problem which affects all of us. One of the programs through which they’re doing that work is the elimination of harmful cultural practices education and action and, through that, the promotion of a new event entitled Daughter’s Day.

The Indo-Canadian Women’s Association has worked hard for 30 years and the Alberta NDP is very proud to have some their members here today as our guests. I would now like to ask my guests to rise as I call their names: Jagjeet Bhardwaj, Gita Das, Sabrina Atwal, and Mahvish Parvez. I’d invite members to join me in welcoming them to the Assembly. The Speaker: Are there others? The hon. Minister of Environment and Water. Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It’s a pleasure for me to rise today to introduce to you and through you to members of this Assembly six outstanding leaders in the constituen cy of Drayton Valley-Calmar. I am pleased to have them join us here today. They are my constituents and representatives of Brazeau county council. With us today we have Reeve Wes Tweedle, CAO Ron McCullough, Councillor Anthony Heinrich, Councillor Robert Kitching, Councillor Dawn Konelsky, and Councillor Shirley Mahan. Please give them the traditional warm welcome this Assembly. head: Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Calder.

Prostate Cancer Awareness Mr. Elniski: The month of Movember is the one month a year when clean -shaven men everywhere have an excuse to grow a moustache in support of finding a cure for the most common of all male cancers, prostate cancer. While the Movember campaign is a fun and unique way to draw attention to the issue that most men would be quite content to never draw attention to, it effectively underlies the importance of the problem.

As I mentioned in my introduction, I started a moustache for Movember, and last Saturday at the fourth annual Calder Cla ssic curling fun-spiel we graciously accepted a donation in exchange for the privilege of shaving it off. Mrs. Anna Janus, owner of my favourite bakery, the Wellington Bakery, was high bidder at the auction for the opportunity to do away with the nose broom. Sadly, Anna could not be with us here today as bakers work the kind of hours only shared by night auditors, but we know that she is here in spirit. 1:40 Mr.

Speaker, this is the second year that Anna and her husband, Matt, have paid the price to help end prostate cancer. This year I must particularly applaud her choice of Jamie as her assistant. Now, this is the third year in my constituency that we have done this, and it was for me by far the least painful. Jamie was a great help and did her best to k eep my need for Band -Aids to a mini- mum. She truly did a great job. When it comes to prostate cancer, Mr. Speaker, we all know the statistics.

Since Movember is an awareness program aimed at men, we can all feel for the other guy knowing full well that it won’t happen to us. Given that it won’t happen to any of the men here, there is absolutely no risk whatsoever in not taking the exam. I urge all men as subtly as I can to accept the reality that if left untreated, this cancer can kill you, and if it doesn’t, it will mess up some things that you’d likely prefer not to have messed up. Donate towards the research. Go for the exam. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Mountain View. Primary Care Networks Dr.

Swann: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Ensuring access to primary care – family doctors, nurses, and other health professionals – is a key element to maintaining good health and preventing disease and injury. If every Albertan had access to primary care, we wo uld see dramatically better health outcomes, shorter wait times in emergency rooms, and reduced cost to the taxpayer.

Primary care networks, or PCNs, were created in 2003 to increase access to primary care, to increase disease and injury prevention and manage patients with chronic disease, and to improve co-ordination and integration with other health care services and professionals and multidisciplinary teams. There are now 40 primary care networks across Alberta covering nearly 80 per cent of Albertans, helping to place thousands of unattached patients to a primary care team every year. Unfortunately, they are still operating at the same funding per patient as in 2003.

A recent two-and -a-half-year evaluation of the PCNs, funded by the public purse and mysteriously prevented from public release, found that relative to patients not served by a PCN, the PCN improved access, improved management of patients with complex medical conditions, improved co-ordination of care, and fostered the development and expans ion of multidisciplinary teams, just what the health care research supports. Edmonton’s south side PCN, for example, has provided more access to geriatric care and decreased visits to the emergency room.

In Wood Buffalo the number of patients seen by doctors has nearly doubled with a PCN. Spruce Grove’s PCN has also reduced emergency room visits significantly. Primary care networks work. They are not perfect, and the staff I’ve spoken to are committed to making them even more effective and efficient in their use of public resources. That’s why they’re a key component to the Alberta Liberal plan to fix the health care system.

Unfortunately, this PC government appears to be moving in the wrong direction, creating instability and hampering the potential of P CNs by underresourcing them and now floating the idea of family clinics. What our health care system needs now is stability, and what PCNs and their passionate workforce . . . The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-McClung. Edmonton-McClung Schools Mr. Xiao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This afternoon I feel honoured to speak to the Assembly about a very important group of institutions in the constituency of Edmonton- McClung, our schools.

The constituency that I am fortunate enough to represent contains 15 schools, all of which are doing a wonderful job of preparing our children for the future. From the Talmud Torah school, which teaches with an emphasis on Jewish culture, to the Centennial public elementary school to the Oscar Romero Catholic high school, the schools in Edmonton-McClung represent students from very diverse back -

November 24, 2011 Alberta Hansard 1357 grounds while maintaining the educational excellence we have all come to expect. As our constituency continues to grow, the Alberta government has provided the support needed to ensure that the educational needs of our communities are met. Mr. Speaker, last September Sister Annata Brockman Catholic elementary and junior high school opened its doors to 500 students thanks to a $23 million investment from our government.

Over $22 mill ion has been invested into the 850-student Bessie Nichols public elementary and junior high school, which is currently under construction in the Hamptons and is set to open in 2012. Mr. Speaker, this government recognizes that an important part of building a strong and inclusive education system is having the essential infrastructure in place. For this reason, over the past three years we have invested $1.7 billion into the construction and the modernization of schools in Alberta. The future of our province depends upon a well-educated work force. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women Ms Calahasen: I rise today to encourage my colleagues and all Albertans to wear a white ribbon to recognize November 25 as International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. It saddens me to say that at least 1 out of every 3 women around the world has been beaten, coerced into sex, or otherwise abused in her lifetime, with the abuser usually someone known to her. Violence against women and girls takes many different forms and is not limited to any culture, country, or specific group of women.

No one should have to be part of a violent relationship where they feel threatened or insecure, nor should any child grow up watching a parent being abused. The White Ribbon Campaign is the largest effort in the world of men working to help end violence against wome n. Established in Canada in 1991, it has evolved to include men and women standing together to help address this important issue. The campaign continues until December 6, Canada’s National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women, which commemorates the tragic murder of 14 young women at l’école Polytechnique de Montréal in 1989. Mr.

Speaker, violence has tremendous consequences for our children and our families and should not be tolerated. Wearing a white ribbon is a personal pledge to never commit, condone, or remain silent about violence against women and girls. It is an important reminder that we all have a role in ending abuse. We cannot stand idly by while watching someone who suffers at the hands of another.

Eliminating violence again st women is everyone’s respon- sibility, and I encourage all Albertans to take a moment during the White Ribbon Campaign to reflect on what they can do to help support stronger families and build safer communities. Together, Mr. Speaker, we can help break the cycle of violence. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Little Bow. Remembrance Day Service in Vulcan Mr. McFarland: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This year’s Remem - brance Day service put on by the Vulcan Royal Canadian Legion branch 21 was a great community effort.

Along with the traditional service a group of young ladies from County Central high school and the Vulcan Community Choir offered up two songs: In Flanders Fields and Peace Song. The highlight of the service, though, had to be the piping in of the Royal Canadian Legion colors by the Solicitor General’s pipe and drum band. What an amazing sight to see coming through the doors. During the service they played a truly sensational versi on of Amazing Grace that had everyone trembling. I would like to acknowledge a number of people who have made this pipe and drum band possible.

Originally conceived, the idea was presented to former Solicitor General Harvey Cenaiko, our former colleague f rom Calgary-Buffalo. Then the idea was approved by our current Member for Stony Plain, who was then Solicitor General. I thank them for that initiative. The band is made up of Pipe Major James Perry, Drum Major Simon Turner, Pipe Sergeant Greg Medley, Drum Sergeant Chric Robbins, Dick Ellsworth, Ken Knoll, Wayne LaRoche, Pat Matthews, Jim Medley, Warren Posch, Ryan Van Horlick, and Deputy Chief Chris Kluthe. These men volunteer their time and talent, taking this band across the province, Mr. Speaker.

This is truly a wonderful display of their music and dedication as members of our public service. Their backgrounds: corrections, sheriffs, and RCMP. On behalf of all of those who attended the service in Vulcan on November 11, my comrades at Vulcan Legion 21, and myself, thank you very much. head: Oral Question Period The Speaker: First Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Public Health Inquiry Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier said in her emergency debate that we are not defined by our hopes and wants but by our actions. I disagree.

Albertans are defined by their hopes and wants and actions, and they want a safe public health care system. By not calling a public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act, the Premier stands in the way of the truth, improving the lives of our seniors, cancer sufferers, mentally ill, and all Albertans waiting in the waiting rooms. Does the Premier want to be defined as a flip-flopping promise breaker, or will she . . . The Speaker: The hon. the Premier. Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, we are doing the right thing.

We’re introducing legislation that’s going to allow for a public inquiry that’s independent, that’s judge led, that can compel witnesses. That’s going to ensure that we have a strong public health care system that serves Albertans. 1:50 Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, the Premier’s answers are confusing because I have these articles saying that she promised a public inquiry, not a public relations exercise and a delay exercise as we already have the tools in place under the Public Inquiries Act to call the inquiry.

Did the Premier really call for a real public inquiry, or are her comments in all of these recently tabled articles wrong? Ms Redford: What we’re doing as a government is entirely consistent with what I said that we would do. We are having an inquiry. It will be public. It will be independent. It can be judge led, and it can compel witnesses. Mr. Speaker, it can also ensure that a council that understands the issues related to health care is involved in the inquiry, and that’s what matters to Albertans.

1358 Alberta Hansard November 24, 2011 Dr. Sherman: Mr. Speaker, the only thing that’s consistent here is that the government is consistently breaking its promises. Given that the Premier’s promise is well documented in these articles, news reports, and even her own website, will the Premier just end the charade and the confusion and say plainly whether or not she will call a public inquiry today under the Public Inquiries Act, and if so, when? Ms Redford: The only person who seems to be confused is the Leader of the Official Opposition. We have been very clear, Mr.

Speaker, that the most important piece of work in this legislation is that this inquiry w ill be fully independent, and we’ve put legis - lation in place that I hope this House passes so that we can ensure that public health care is supported in the province. The Speaker: Second Official Opposition main question. The hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Mental Health Services Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Here is another confusing issue.

When questioned yesterday about kicking the mentally ill to the curb, the Premier said that opposition questions undermine the independence of provincial offices and institutions. Apparently, democracy under her rule is when everyone just shuts up and does what she says. Immediately after taking office, the Premier made political coronations that meddled in the ruling of a quasi -judicial body, the AUC. Isn’t the Premier’s interference in the regulatory process more dangerous to independence? How much more of this can Albertans expect as her reign continues? Ms Redford: Well, Mr.

S peaker, there’s no doubt that that was a confusing question. I’ll try to answer both parts of it. What I’ll say is that we have a regulatory structure in this province that allows for independent decisions to be made. I respect that process and in no way interfere with that process. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The only confusing thing is what one minister says and what the Premier says.

Given that questioning the Premier is clearly thought of as dangerous to her democracy and our democracy and our provincial institutions, doesn’t the Premier think it’s equally dangerous not to understand the difference between having competent management staff and giving them the resources that they need to do their job so that you don’t have to kick the mentally ill Albertans, as stated in this memo, to the curb? Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I believe we’re now talking about mental health issues. Again, I’m very happy to speak about that. They’re very important to Albertans.

One of the issues that came up yesterday subsequent to question period was comments from a Dr. Owen Heisler, who is the medical director for Edmonton zone, who made it very clear that there has never been anyone discharged to the streets who may have had issues that needed to be dealt with around mental health and the health care system. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Sherman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s clear that there are many psychiatrists who have been discharged out of their profession and out of this province and country.

Given that over three years ago the Auditor General recommended properly imple menting the mental health plan, creating better standards, accountability, funding, planning, and reporting of mental health services – and the list goes on and on – at a time when the Premier was in charge of SafeCom, why didn’t this government take these recommendations seriously before Albertans were kicked to the curb? In light of this evidence what’s the Premier and the government going to do to rectify this?

Ms Redford: The Auditor General’s report, which has been the topic of this week, actually refe rs to the fact that a number of the recommendations that have been made with respect to mental health care and services for people that might have mental health care issues had been acted on in every respect. There was progress made on all of them, Mr. Speaker. I would remind the hon. House that as a government we’ve introduced the safe communities ini- tiative, which has brought mental health beds to every community across this province that identified a need.

In addition to that, we’ve seen a very active mental health plan that has begun to address these issues overall in rural communities. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. PC Party Benefit Plan Trust Mr. MacDonald: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My first question is to the Premier. Is the benefit plan trust for the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta funded from money collected by the party through the Election Finances and Contri - butions Disclosure Act? Speaker’s Ruling Questions about Political Party Activity The Speaker: I’m sorry.

Questions dealing with political party activities are not part of the purview of the question period. [interjection] I’m sorry. That’s in the rules. Mr. MacDonald: That’s not in the rules. The Speaker: Okay. The hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore. Provincial Tax Alternatives Mr. Hinman: This week the Finance minister and the President of the Treasury Board told Albertans that they are looking for new ways to increase taxes despite record revenues.

First, the Finance minister openly speculated about introducing a new sales tax and went on to talk about taxing middle-class Albertans by introducing some new form of Alberta health care premiums. Then yesterday this Premier said that nothing is off the table on the next budget and was anything but clear when questioned by the media on new taxes. Albertans would like to know, Premier: what new taxes will they have to pay under your tax-and-spend agenda? Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, yesterday when we were discussing this – we’ve discussed it every day in many public forums.

The Minister of Finance, the President of the Treasury Board, and I have all discussed the fact that through public consultations we’ve been talking about what all of the revenue options are that could be available for the future. Mr. Hinman: Yeah, new taxes. This Premier has been anything but clear on how she plans on balancing the budget for 2013- 14 and believes, like any good tax - and-spend Liberal, that the only way to balance the books is to tax

November 24, 2011 Alberta Hansard 1359 individual families and businesses until she can pay for everything that she wants. What type of new taxes is she planning to bring to punish Albertans with? Ms Redford: Well, Mr. Speaker, that might be the simplis tic approach taken by the member of this party. It’s not the approach that we intend to take. We’re consulting with Albertans. We’re ensuring that we fully discuss with Albertans the options. In fact, I think that’s an incredibly simplistic analysis of wha t a fiscal framework would look like. Mr.

Hinman: My final question is to Kim Campbell – I mean, the Premier, and it’s a simple one. Given this typical doublespeak about tax hikes from the deficit twins and the Premier and given her waffling on this subject, will she state here and now that she will not raise any taxes or introduce any new fees, premiums, or taxes on Albertans? She has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Don’t take it out on our children or the families here in Alberta. Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, I’m going to listen to what Albertans are telling me about what they want the future of this province to look like.

I will tell you that what Albertans are saying is that they are proud and optimistic and hopeful about the future, and they are not listening to this critical and cynical approach and simplistic approach to what a long -term fiscal plan for this province looks like. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood. Northern Gateway Pipeline Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Energy Resources Conservation Board has recently estimated that the percentage of bitumen produced in Alberta is continuing to decline and that by 2020 will be well below the government’s own target.

The Tories’ failure to upgrade more bitumen in Alberta means a failure to invest in value-added industries and a missed opportunity to provide quality long-term jobs for Albertans. Will the Premier insist that the Northern Gateway pipeline be reconfigured so that it transports synthetic crude oil instead of bitumen as a precondition for the government of Alberta’s support? Ms Redford: Mr. Speaker, as we move forward with Northern Gateway, there are going to be a number of issues that the private - sector proponents are going to have to consider.

What we know is that in terms of economic decisions that will be made by investors in this pipeline, they’ll take a look at where we’re going in terms of our economic development. This is certainly a time when we have to consider all options. At the end of the day it will be for propo- nents to determine what the final construction should look like. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’ve never heard such a complicated non-answer.

Given that it’s more profitable for corporations to export unpro- cessed bitumen than synthetic crude and given that this costs Alberta investment and jobs, why won’t the PC government enact policies that ensure that the export of unprocessed bitumen is less profitable than the export of synthetic crude, upgrade it right here in Alberta, and do the right thing for Alberta’s working people? 2:00 Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, the leader of the fourth party knows very well that this government has undertaken to co-operate in a $5- billion new upgrading program that will process 40,000 barrels a day of bitumen.

That will create 8,000 jobs in construction, 600 when they’re operating, has the possibility of expansion to two or three times the current level, and is connected to a carbon capture and storage operation and enhanced oil recovery, which, actually, will more than pay for the project over time. Mr. Mason: Sometimes things work out perfectly, Mr. Speaker.

Given that this Tory government has incurred at least $3 billion in liabilities and contributes 75 per cent of the operating costs to the North West upgrader, why won’t the government adopt a policy of increased export price for bitumen relative to synthetic crude oil and let the private sector build the upgraders and incur the risk? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, again, the leader of the fourth party – that party has never been noted for its in -depth understanding of how the economy works. There involves a certain amount of risk taking in any operation.

Whether an operation makes money or loses money, it doesn’t matter whether it’s public sector or private sector. We’re sharing the risk with the operators, and that’s what’s going to build that new upgrader. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary -Mountain View , followed by the hon. Member for West Yellowhead. Mental Health Services (continued) Dr. Swann: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Alberta psychi atrists are blowing the whistle on the critical lack of mental health beds and professionals in Alberta. According to Dr.

Lloyd Maybaum, a Calgary psychiatrist threatened with dismissal when he expressed concerns, quote, the planning and announcement of the new five - year mental health action plan is another brutal example of the autocratic approach that Alberta Health Services and Alberta Health and Wellness routinely adopt. To the Premier: why were psychiatrists not consulted in this plan? Is this what you call engagement? Ms Redford: Mr.

Speaker, everything that Alberta Health Ser - vices has done and everything that has been done in Alberta Health and Wellness is about building a system that can provide wraparound services with respect to mental health. These suggestions that certain professions have not been consulted are entirely incorrect. We have people who are part of our health care system both as private medical practitioners as well as in Alberta Health and Wellness who’ve been fully consulted with r espect to implementation.

As we move ahead, let’s remember that the way that government works right now is that we introduce plans, we consult ahead of time, and then we consult during further develop- ment. My understanding with respect to mental health pl ans at the moment that are being undertaken by the government is that we’re going to do exactly that. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Swann: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. That flies in the face of the evidence. The new mental health plan makes no indication of the critical shortage of beds. What is this so-called plan based on? Ms Redford: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I don’t believe that a suggestion from the hon. member is proof or evidence of any particular fact. If he has further information, I’d certainly be happy to take that.

1360 Alberta Hansard November 24, 2011 Mr. Speaker, what this mental health plan does is speak to the services that need to be available across this province for people that are dealing with those issues. Of course beds are a part of that, but one of the things that we know is that we’re going to have services, some of which are in treatment and some of which are out of treatment and in the community. I will tell you as we move ahead that this suggestion that there is a critical shortage of beds is nothing more than an allegation from the opposition. Dr.

Swann: Well, it’s clear that the Premier doesn’t make a connec- tion between shortage of psychiatric beds and ER wait times. Very unfortunate that she doesn’t understand that. Will the Premier admit that such plans ignore both the evidence and the people primarily involved in mental health care and that this plan is a sham? Ms Redford: Well, Mr. Speaker, there’s an awful lot of people that I will take advice from about the health care system and whether or not emergency wait times and mental health care beds should be connected.

I’m fortunate, I’ll have to say, that one of them is not the member of the opposition because at the end of day there are many people who have opinions on the mental health care system and on the health care system. The job of government is to ensure that we have put in place practitioners and managers that understand the system intimately and understand the intricate connection between the day-to-day operations. All of these wild allegations that cre ate fear in the health care system are not responsible. The Speaker: The hon. Member for West Yellowhead, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo.

Supply of Diesel Fuel Mr. Campbell: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For the second year in a row Albertans such as farmers, truckers, and bus companies have faced a shortage of diesel fuel. This is exactly what you wouldn’t expect in a province rich in fossil fuel resources. My question is to the Minister of Energy. How could this possibly happen two years in a row, and was there any impact on essential services like fire or ambulance? Dr. Morton: Mr.

Speaker, the immediate or approximate causes for last month’s shortage of diesel fuel were a combination of the fire at the refinery in Regina and also that the Suncor Edmonton refinery was not getting the supply of hydrogen that it needs to make the diesel. The hon. member is right. This has been a recurrent problem. The good news there is that the Alberta Economic Development Authority has made a set of recom mendations analyzing the problem, and working with my colleague here, we are taking action to address the problem in the future. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Campbell: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Diesel fuels our school buses, so a shortage can compromise students so they can’t get to school. To the Minister of Education: what is the minister doing to ensure that this shortage and, hopefully not, future shortages do not impact the students’ ability to get to school? Mr. Lukaszuk: That is a good question because I’m sure that question is on the minds of many parents, particularly in rural Alberta. Mr. Speaker, I have to tell you that individual school boards have made arrangements with local diesel fuel providers.

School buses are considered to be a priority in all municipalities, and I’m being told that at this point in time there are enough reserves in place to ensure that our children get to and from school safely. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Campbell: Thank you, Mr. Speake r. My last question is for the President of Treasury Board and Enterprise. In June of this year the Alberta Economic Development Authority submitted a report that examined the issue of fuel shortages in this province and made recommendations on how to address them.

To the minister: are we acting on this report, or is it simply gathering dust on a shelf? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Horner: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the Minister of Energy indicated, the Alberta Economic Development Authority did produce a report, which identified three areas of concern: improving the fuel supply chain, maintaining adequate fuel inventories, and encouraging new sources of refined products. As was identified earlier in question period with the leader of the fourth party, we are doing exactly that in terms of identifying and encouraging new sources of product.

In addition to that, the Minister of Energy and I are currently engaged in bringing the suppliers together so that we can have a discussion with them about those inventories and about where we need to go as it relates to the Alberta Economic Development Authority report. Bitumen Royalty in Kind Program Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Energy. It just appears that the left hand of his government does not know what the right hand is doing.

One minute you have a Premier saying that we believe there is an opportunity to do more upgrading in Alberta, and next we have a minister saying that upgrading in Alberta is a crapshoot. In any event, c an the minister tell me: are they getting even deeper into the business of upgrading by extending the BRIK program, or are they getting out of the business of being in business? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, the record is very clear on this. This government is proceeding with the BRIK program with the North West upgrader. We’re in the process of negotiations with North West and CNRL at the moment.

This is a risk -sharing operation between CNRL and North West and the government, and as I indicated in my earlier an swer, it’s going to provide 8,000 jobs in construction, 600 permanent jobs, new tax base in the county, and supplies of diesel, so less chances of the recurrence of the diesel shortage that was referred to in the earlier question. Mr.

Hehr: Well, given that the Minister of Energy, well known for his firewall letter wherein he stated that Alberta should be pulling government out of the business of subsidizing business, can this minister assure us today that he’s not going to let blind Conservative philosophy get in the way of doing what is in the best interests of the Alberta people, which may well be to have our government play a larger role in bitumen upgrading? Dr. Morton: I think what I said quite clearly, Mr. Speaker, is that I fully support and am taking responsibility for advancing the North West project.

In terms of a go-forward basis I agree completely with our Premier that what’s needed now is a robust discussion of the various instruments that government has at its disposal to incent more upgrading. That’s the discussion that will be taking place in our caucus in the coming months. 2:10 Mr. Hehr: Well, Mr. Speaker, it’s good to talk not only to your caucus members. Given that it’s always important for the Minister

November 24, 2011 Alberta Hansard 1361 of Energy to consult with industry players on something as major as bitumen upgrading in this province, can the minister share with us what views are being expressed to him about the possibility of the Alberta government being more involved in the upgrading process? Dr. Morton: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows full well, there is a whole spectrum of opinions on this subject. We receive all of them. There is a spectrum of opinions within our caucus.

I think that if you paid close attention to what the Premier said in her remarks last night, she is inviting a full debate on what the options are. I think that’s one of the marks of this new govern ment: a full policy debate about not just choosing one option and charging down that road but discussing what the options are in advance. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo. Grain Marketing Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This spring our Legislature had a vigorous debate on a government motion relating to marketing choice for thousands of Alberta grain farmers. On October 18 the federal Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Gerry Ritz, tabled Bill C-18, Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, which will end the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly on western Canadian wheat and barley marketing on August 1, 2012. My question is to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development. What is this government’s current position on Bill C-18 and marketing freedom for grain farmers? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr.

Berger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for that question. The government of Alberta strongly believes and supports that wheat and barley producers should have the choice of offering their product to whatever market they should happen to choose, including the Canadian Wheat Board. So we do support this transition. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Prins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My next question to the same minister: given that producers are already making decisions for the next crop year, what impact will this have on Alberta’s wheat and barley producers? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr.

Berger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This decision wi ll allow individual producers to make decisions to market their crops based on market signals and to plan their spring planting around that rather than around what wouldn’t have been their choices before. Selling into niche markets and establishing relatio nships with cus tomers from around the world as well as at home is part of the freedom of our grain industry in Alberta. Mr. Speaker, I can say that since 1986 I personally have not had to use the Canadian Wheat Board, and I have grown and sold grain every year. There are markets here to access.

The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Prins: Thank you very much. I like that last comment a great deal. Mr. Speaker, my final question is also for the same minister. How is the provincial government helping Alberta farmers make this final transition? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Berger: Thank you once again. Alberta Agriculture is working diligently with our federal counterparts as well as our industry partners here in Alberta to provide clear, transparent, and unbiased information to producers so they can make the best decisions based on their individual operations. Mr.

Speaker, this decision will open up opportunities for value - added in rural Alberta. It will bring home our young producers that have gone off to the city to go to work. This is a great oppor - tunity. It will build rural Alberta and bring back our youth. Thank you. Funding for Private Schools Mr. Hehr: Mr. Speaker, government should support equality of opportunity. Equality of opportunity is the principle that whether you’re born into a rich family or a poor family, you’l l have the opportunity to succeed. This is a cornerstone of any democratic, equitable society.

The way governments ensure equality of opportunity is through a publicly funded and delivered education system. To the Minister of Education. Given that the Prem ier stated that she is concerned with the continuing development of private and charter schools and that because of these the public system is at risk of being a second -tier level of education, how is the minister going to ensure that this does not happen? Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, our Premier, like me and everybody on this side of the House, we are committed to a public education system. But we are also committed to choice.

The problem is what we’re hearing from the other side, this member for the last three days going out of his way trying to characterize private schools as elitist and only for the rich. As a matter of fact, that’s not the case. We have Sikh schools both in Edmonton and Calgary. We have Islamic academies in Edmonton. We have many private schools that do not cater to the rich, do not cater to the elite of Alberta but simply cater to parents who want to exercise choice. Mr.

Hehr: To the same minister: given the Premier’s concerns about the continuing development of private and charter schools what is this minister doing to address this situation given that we are creating a system that divides the wealthy from the poor and the religious from the secular ? Does the minister understand that this is not developing an inclusive system? Mr. Lukaszuk: Well, Mr. Speaker, this member should be less concerned about the Premier’s concerns and be more concerned about facts because he is as far away from facts as he possibly can be. As you know, Mr. Speaker, it’s not a secret.

It’s a world-known fact that Alberta education is in the ranks of the top five always and usually the top three. Finland and Korea and Alberta, not Canada but Alberta, usually are the countries considered to be the leaders in education and partly because of the fact that we hav e choice. I choose to send my daughter to a Catholic school system. You may choose to send your children to public. Another person can send them to a charter, and the list goes on. Mr.

Hehr: Given that this government divides our children by funding private schools with public funds up to $127 million a year, will the minister cut public funding to private schools in order to act on the Premier’s concerns about the continued growth of private and charter schools?

1362 Alberta Hansard November 24, 2011 Mr. Lukaszuk: Again, concerned about the Pre mier’s concerns and not concerned about the facts. Mr. Speaker, we fund private schools only at a rate of some 70 per cent of regular funding. They build their own infrastructure. One could actually argue, if you want to use the twisted logic of the oppos ition, the fact that the private schools subsidize public schools because kids go to school and we don’t have to pay for the infrastructure. Speaker’s Ruling Decorum The Speaker: Hon. members, as I understood this, the hon. Member for Calgary-Buffalo asked a question of the hon.

Minister of Education. The hon. Minister of Education was giving the answer, and the hon. Member for Calgary -Buffalo was yelling at somebody and not listening to him. I’ve got to figure this one out, okay? If I recognize you to ask a question, I hope that somebody will listen to the response. I know it’s Thursday. The hon. Member for Edmonton- Ellerslie, followed by the hon. Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo. Immigrant Nominee Program Mr. Bhardwaj: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

There have been many stories in the media about the federal government and the new numbers for the Alberta immigrant nominee program. My first question is to the Minister of Intergovernmental, International and Aboriginal Relations. Can the minis ter tell us if Alberta’s AINP numbers have gone up, decreased, or stayed the same? Mr. Dallas: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’ve heard those stories through the media as well. As far as I know, the numbers for 2012 have not been officially released. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Bhardwaj: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Back to the same minister.

There are many different streams when it comes to AINP. How many people can Alberta bring in permanently through this program? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Dallas: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The federal govern - ment gives all of the provinces a number – it’s a bit like a quota – and in our case the number is 5,000 that it’s capped at for 2011. This means that there will be no more than 5,000 this year. Last year we nominated 5,000 workers plus their families for perma - nent residence, and obviously this year we’ll nominate the same number. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr.

Bhardwaj: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My final question to the same minister. There are concerns in my constitu - ency of Edmonton-Ellerslie regarding the shortage of a skilled workforce. How can we increase our workforce of skilled workers if we’re capped at 5,000 every year? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Dallas: Well, thank you. Mr. Speaker, 5,000 is obviously not enough for our growing economy.

In fact, when I was in Ottawa last week, I had this conversation with Jason Kenney, who is the federal Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, and I stressed Alberta’s need for more workers and our concerns with the cap. As I said earlier, the numbers for 2012 have not been officially released, but together with the Minister of Human Services we continue to work with the federal government to get more than the 5,000 previously allocated. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Landowner Private Property Rights Mr.

Boutilier: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Deputy Premier on the issue of land rights. I looked at my calendar. Actually, it says November, but I thought it might have been April Fool’s Day. The reason why is that the government has just announced a task force on land rights and property owners. I have to ask the Deputy Premier: why would you think that land- owners would pay attention to the government now based on the shabby work of bills 19, 24, 36, and 50? Why would they trust you today? 2:20 Mr. Horner: Mr.

Speaker, today at the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties I had the opportunity to talk to a number of municipal leaders in our province. Actually, they appre- ciated the efforts that we’re doing on Bill 19, which the Minister of Infrastructure is bringing forward into this House, which is actually Bill 23 on the Order Paper here, which is an excellent piece of adjustment. They’ve also expressed to us over the last several months some concerns that they’ve had with other areas of legis - lation and property rights. But it goes beyond that, Mr. Speaker.

It’s time that we started talking about the reality of property rights, not the myths . . . The Speaker: The hon. member, please. [interjection] The hon. member, please. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks for the answer. I’ll give him more time on this one. Given the fact that landowners have said that this government hasn’t been listening when it comes to the amendments on some of the bills – 19, 24, 36, and 50 – I have to ask him: why would the task force listen to you now since you didn’t listen to them before? Mr. Horner: Well, actually, Mr.

Speaker, the consultation that went into the original land -use planning framework of the lower Athabasca and a number of the other plans across the province was based on consultation with Albertans and with landowners. I, as many members in our caucus, am a landowner. I own land in this province that I hold very dearly in my heart. It’s a value that Albertans and pioneers fought in wars and settled this province to have and to hold. Nobody is taking away my property rights, and this government is going to protect Albertans’ property rights. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given that nonresponse, Mr. Speaker, I will table from the Athabasca Advocate a member of this cabinet and this government who, in fact, spoke so poorly about landowners in the comments, saying that they are just nothing more than fearmongering. I have to ask you. He is a member of your government and cabinet, and in fact I will table what his comments were about Alberta landowners. Do you think that, actually, landowners will believe that he will listen to them?

November 24, 2011 Alberta Hansard 1363 Mr. Horner: Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure that I understand that last question. There was an accusation in there that was unfounded. There was naming of a member, I’m assuming, that’s in there that’s probably unfounded based on what I understand to be a newspaper article. Rather irresponsible of a member of this House, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: I’m sure that the document in question will be tabled at the appropriate time this afternoon. Mr. Boutilier: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: A point of order, too? Mr. Boutilier: That’s correct.

The Speaker: Oh, it has to be Thursday. The hon. Member for Edmonton -Centre, followed by the hon. Member for Red Deer-North. Funding for Bedbug Infestations Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Bedbugs are costing my constituents living in apartments, cond os, seniors’ residences, and shelters huge problems and a lot of money, but because there’s no disease, the Alberta government considers them pests and has not developed an income support policy for low-income Albertans, including seniors and those on AISH . Without an official policy people have to know to seek director approval for any support.

It’s a wicked, wicked hide -and-seek for people under stress. To the Minister of Human Services: will the minister please co -ordinate with AHS to produce a public infor - mation campaign on recognizing bedbug infestations and the need for fast treatment? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For a moment there I thought we were going to be asked for an income support program for bedbugs. I understand the hon. member’s concerns and the issue that she’s raising. It is a very important issue with respect to bedbugs this year in Alberta, as I understand it.

I don’t understand much more about it, and I will talk with the hon. member further about what’s happening in her area and how we can assist those who are unable to afford the process themselves. It is an infestation that causes a problem we need to resolve. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Blakeman: Thank you.

Back to the same minister: well, Minister, given that treatment for bedbugs requires people to spend money to rewash clothes, purchase extra cleaning supplies, bags to wrap clothing, and to move and store furniture, will the minister direct his department to develop and distribute a policy on financial support for low-income seniors and AISH recipients for funding for bedbug infestations? Mr. Hancock: Mr.

Speaker, I’d go a little bit further than that to say that what I have indicated to people in our department is that they should use principle -based decision -making with respect to support for children and families who need support. In working with individuals who have a financial issue, they need to work through those issues with them and assist them with the right kind of support at t he right time. We will be looking at our policies in that area.

One of my mandates is looking at the whole social policy framework and, within that, the context of income supports so that we’re supporting people in the right way at the right time, not just with financial support but also with family support to determine how they can do better for families. The Speaker: The hon. member, please. Ms Blakeman: Good. Thank you again. Back to the same minister. In some cases seniors and others may be required to find overnight accommodation while their unit or their floor is treated for bedbugs.

Will the minister develop and distribute a policy to cover the cost of hotel accommodation if family or friends are unable to provide short-term accommodation? Mr. Hancock: Mr. Speaker, one of the things that I’m trying to establish as we move forward with the social policy framework and really look at our income support w ithin that context is that rather than reacting to each specific instance with a new rule and regulation and a new policy, we look generically at issues to say: how do we need to support people so that they can live in human dignity, and how can we assist them to be as independent as possible?

This would, in my view, fall within that purview of saying: how do we need to help people when they need help in the right way without a knee -jerk reaction of writing a new rule or a new policy? Support for Caregivers Mrs. Jablonski: Mr. Speaker, providing care for a family member in need is a centuries-old act of kindness, love, and loyalty, and as life expectancies increase and medical treatments advance, more of us will participate in the caregiving process. Unfort unately, caregiving can create serious burnout for the caregiver if they don’t get adequate support.

To the Minister of Seniors: have we considered the importance of caregiver support programs, and can you tell me if government programs are currently in place? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. VanderBurg: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the member for the important question. I think all of us can relate to caregivers’ stress. I know the time when my dad was so sick, how we saw my mom even get ill and how I saw my brother and my sister get ill. Ca regiver support in a community is vital, and in some communities, you know, you don’t have the network that other communities have.

Under my ministry we have supple - mented the efforts of families and friends and community members in assisting seniors and p ersons with disabilities to live as independently as they can in their communities. The Speaker: The hon. member, please. Mrs. Jablonski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: has the government considered developing caregiver support programs through initiatives such as partnerships for conferences, training courses, and a caregiver support line? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. VanderBurg: Well, thank you again for that question.

In fact, there are two programs in my ministry that provide funds to support caregivers. The PDD program that funds services that provide a break for primary nonpaid and paid caregivers on a temporary basis exists, and as well a special -needs assistance program provides funding for respite care for family care providers who provide care to a senior with a medical condition, sir.

1364 Alberta Hansard November 24, 2011 Mrs. Jablonski: To the same minister: given that foster care pro - grams for children have respite care available for foster parents, will the government put in place and ensure similar access to respite care programs to help prevent burnout for full-time caregivers? Mr. VanderBurg: Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to be in Cardston a couple of weeks ago, and I saw the action of a community getting together with all their care providers and all their care agencies to find ways of supporting those caregivers in the home and outside the home.

I know that this is an issue that the department of health is working on, and the ministry is taking lots of ideas right now from all the public. If any member here wants to get involved in this discussion, I’m open to this discus - sion. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-McCall, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. Highway Maintenance Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government plans to purchase an extra $15 million of salt, sand, and gravel for use in highway maintenance.

Last year the province bought an extra $10.4 million worth of salt, sand, and gravel above the budget of $25 million and in 2009- 10 an extra $13.6 million worth. To the Minister of Transportation: when the department misses the set $25 million budget consistently for three years, doesn’t that mean more should be budgeted in the first place? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Danyluk: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to remind the hon. member that in Alberta the weather is very volatile, and at times we need to be prepared.

We need to ensure that we do have the sand and gravel and we have the salt so that if we have a weather system that comes through, we don’t leave Albertans at risk. This is about safety on our roads. 2:30 Mr. Kang: This is three years in a row, Mr. Speaker. Can we plan in the first place? We can put more money aside. To the minister again: given that, why is the government buying salt, sand, and gravel for highway maintenance at all when we have contracted out highway maintenance in the province? Mr. Danyluk: Mr.

Speaker, at the end of the day it is the expense of the government however the maintenance takes place. I want to just mak e a little reference to the comment that the individual member made at the beginning. That was three years in a row we had excess or we bought more. I want to say to you that I would rather buy three years of excess sand than I would have one year of not having sand and salt. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Kang: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given that, did the govern- ment invent a time machine over the summer and now knows that this year we will use 60 per cent more salt, sand, and gravel than it predicted at budget time, or did the government’s groundhog see its shadow earlier this year and predict six extra weeks of winter? Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr.

Speaker, just a little on -the-side comment because if the hon. member can predict weather better than that, then he should be in a different occupation because all of the agriculture, all of the support industry, the maintenance industry that we have in this province would very much like to have that information. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say to you that this government needs to be prepared because we need to ensure that the maintenance of our highways is maintained, and we are ready. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity. Anthony Henday Drive Mr.

Sandhu: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In the past two months we have seen the opening of the northwest leg of Anthony Henday and the new interchanges on the southwest leg. This is good news for the motorists and my constituency, Edmonton- Manning. My question is to the Minister of Transportation. After the countless years when can I tell my constituents this ring road will be finished? Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Edmonton ring road is 90 per cent complete. I also want to say to you that we are looking at 2016 for the completion of the Edmonton ring road.

In fact, we are now looking at three proposals that are bidding on the P3 project. I want to say also that in May 2012 we are going to make that selection, and construction will start in the summer of next year. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Sandhu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: how much is that huge project going to cost taxpayers? Mr. Danyluk: Well, Mr. Speaker, there is no dollar figure yet, but I will say to you that we do have a total of 48 bridges on 27 kilometres of divided roadway, which includes nine interchanges and eight railway crossings and two flybys and two river crossings.

We have invested $2.5 billion on the ring road so far. I can’t tell you what the last end is going to take. I just say to you that we are in the process of finding . . . The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Sandhu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the same minister: is this the right economic time to be focusing on this construction? Mr. Danyluk: Mr. Speaker, let me say to you that Alberta is very much a commodity -based province. Being a commodity -based province, we need to move product from one end of the province to another, and we have to go through the cities or around the cities, so that is very, very important.

Also, we have the opportunity, when we look at the roads around the city, to be able to deal with the individuals who support the city infrastructure. So is t his the right time? Yes, it is the right time. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Varsity, followed by the hon. Member for Calgary-North West. Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement Mr. Chase: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The last few months have seen economic crises rippling through Europe, tipping the world’s economy toward the verge of disaster.

Italy’s, Portugal’s, Greece’s, and Ireland’s economies are spinning out of control and bringing down those closest to them. At the same time this government is participating in negotiations to bind us to this turmoil, putting our economy at risk. To the Minister of Intergovernmental, International and Aboriginal Relations: will this government step up to the Premier’s promise of more transparency in government and make public the Canada-EU trade agreement negotiations it has taken

part in?

November 24, 2011 Alberta Hansard 1365 The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Dallas: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually, I will comment and appreciate the hon. member’s question. The negotia- tions that the hon. member is referring to are negotiations between Canada and the European Union. Those negotiations have advanced through nine rounds of consultation, and at the side of the federal government all of the provinces have been closely involved. We continue to make progress on that, but no agreement has been reached at this time. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Thank you. Hopefully, Albertans will have a

part in setting that agreement and will be informed along with the progress. Given that the scarcity of water is a concern for all Albertans and that many communities are worried about the sale of this resource, can the minister reassure Albertans that the sale of our water is not a part of these international negotiations? Mr. Dallas: Mr. Speaker, we have always been very clear. The Premier has always been very clear. Our water is not for sale. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Chase: Thank you. With reference to the Premier’s clarity, it can change at a day’s notice.

To the same minister: what guarantees can the minister promise Albertans as to debt contagion from Europe after this agreement is signed? Mr. Dallas: Well, Mr. Speaker, there’s no relevance between this agreement and financial issues that are raging in the European economy. We trade on a best-efforts basis with any and all trading partners around the globe, so I don’t see the relevance of a particular jurisdiction’s financial issues. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-North West. Noninstructional Postsecondary Fees Mr. Blackett: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I understand that the minister has asked that postsecondary institutions submit their formal policies for how students will be consulted whenever a new noninstructional fee is considered. However, as recently as this morning students were tweeting about the fact that student consultations on noninstructional fees is not enough. My questions today are to the Minister of Advanced and Technology. Are you going to listen to the students and address these concerns? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Weadick: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On this issue let me be perfectly clear.

We do not support the use of noninstructional fees to circumvent the tuition cap for our postsecondaries in Alberta. Mr. Blackett: Mr. Speaker, my next question is to the same minister. Students are concerned that consultations are really just a heads-up on an increase and not an opportunity for input. How will students provide input? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Weadick: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ve made it very clear to the postsecondary institutions that I expect them to seek ongoing and meaningful input from the stude nts if they’re considering any type of noninstructional fees.

That means that the students will have the chance to ensure that fees are truly noninstructional, for real value, and the students get something in return for these fees. Mr. Blackett: Mr. Speaker, my second supplemental is also to the same minister. As my colleague from Calgary-Mackay asked in this House before, why not just regulate noninstructional fees the same way as they do tuition? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Weadick: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have 21 publicly funded postsecondary institutions in this province, and these are very unique institutions. They’re rural. They’re urban.

They cover a very wide cross-section. We d on’t believe one size fits all. We believe the measure of our success is finding a system that will work in each school, for each set of students, that will provide the opportunity for input and discussion around noninstructional fees. The Speaker: That concludes the question-and-answer period for today. Eighteen hon. members were recognized. There were 103 questions and responses. There’s a bit of business arising out of the question period that we’ll deal with in the latter part of the Routine.

In about 15 seconds from now we’ll return to Members’ Statements. 2:40 head: Members’ Statements (continued) The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Manning. U of A Punjabi Language Program Mr. Sandhu: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to rise today and discuss the funding effort for the Punjabi language program at the University of Alberta and what it meant for the food bank. Sikhs all over the world celebrated the birthday of Siri Guru Nanak Sahib Ji on November 10. Siri Guru Nanak Dev Ji is the founder of the Sikh faith. His birthday is a special day in the hearts of the Sikh community.

To remember Guru Nanak’s birthday, the Sikh community re members his three principles. [Remarks in Punjabi] Pray to God; make honest earnings; share with who needs it most. In recognition of this day Gurdwara Siri Guru Singh Sabha Ji, Gurdwara Nanaksar Ji, Gurdwara Millwoods Ji, Siri Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara Ji as well as th e Punjabi media radiothon jointly made an appeal to donate to the University of Alberta’s Punjabi language program and the local food bank. Keeping a language alive and well for new generations is an achievement that benefits our society.

Through their efforts and donations the Sikh commu- nity have so far raised over $41,000 for the University of Alberta. Mr. Speaker, you will remember that the Sikh community had previously donated over $2.4 million to the University of Alberta Mazankowski Heart Institute’s healing garden in Guru Nanak’s name. What is truly amazing is that this year over $11,000 has been raised for the food bank, and that does not include the tons of dry food donated as well. I hope there is more to come. It was a pleasure being part of the cheque presentation with the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie.

Because of this fundraising effort I hope we can all see Albe rtans’ charity and commitment to the arts. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona.

1366 Alberta Hansard November 24, 2011 Postsecondary Education Affordability Ms Notley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Excellence in advanced education is vital to Alberta’s future success and the quality of life for all of us, yet this government is pursuing policies that make access to superior education more and more difficult for many Albertans. They appear unconcerned that Alberta has the lowest enrolment in postsecondary institutions in Canada, with poor retention and graduation rates. The high cost of education in Alberta has put it out of reach of many.

Massive student debt on graduation is not something that many can consider. Differential tuition fees make some professions very tough to access, financial supports for students are disap- pearing, and institutions are using measures like noninstruc tional fees to desperately try to survive underfunding by the province. The PC government has forced postsecondary institutions between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, they have significantly reduced funding to universities. For example, funding for the U of A and the University of Calgary was lowered by $27 million and $7.8 million, respectively, in 2010.

Precariously positioned, universities have come up with ways to fill their revenue gaps such as by levying huge noninstructional fees. This past year Alberta posted the largest increase in addi tional compulsory fees for both undergraduate and graduate students. Other students, mostly those in graduate schools, have had their tuition increased by more than 50 per cent due to ministerial approval. The high cost of postsecondary education not only limits access to those who can afford it but creates a learning environment in which youth from wealthier families gain a com petitive advan- tage over those who do not.

If this government is truly concerned about having an educated Alberta, it must ensure improved public funding of universities, it must reduce tuition, and it must reverse student debt load. Only then will Alberta be the place where students are not limited in their opportunities to succeed, and a stronger future for all of us can be secured. head: Introduction of Bills The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Premier. Bill 27 Appropriation (Supplementary Supply) Act, 2011 (No. 2) Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I request leave to introduce Bill 27, the Appropriation (Supplementary Supply) Act, 2011 (No. 2), this being a money bill. His Honour the Honourable Lieutenant Governor, having been informed of the contents of this bill, recommends the same to the Assembly. [Motion carried; Bill 27 read a first time] head: Tabling Returns and Reports The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Two tablings today. One is from debate that occurred last evening and was raised in debate by the hon. Member for Calgary -Mountain View. He referenced it.

It is a legal blood- alcohol concentration position statement from the Alberta Centre for Injury Control & Research. It’s a position paper on lowering the legal blood- alcohol concen- tration for drivers. The second one is copies of a letter sent by the may or of Strathcona county, Linda Osinchuk, directed toward the Premier, in which the mayor is pointing out that the Strathcona county council unanimously resolved to prepare an application to the Alberta Utilities Commission to review and vary its decision o n the critical transmission infrastructures.

They’re very concerned that this is a massive overbuild, and they urge the provincial government to reconsider its position. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo. Mr. Boutilier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In question period this afternoon I indicated I would table from the Athabasca Advocate comments that were made by the member. head: Projected Government Business The Speaker: The Official Opposition House Leader. Ms Blakeman: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker.

At this time I would like under Standing Order 7(6) to ask the Government House Leader to please share with those assembled the projected government business for the week commencing November 28. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would anticipate that on Monday, November 28, in the evening for second reading we would deal with Bill 23, the Land Assembly Project Area Amendment Act, 2011, if it’s not completed this afternoon, and in Committee of the Whole Bill 25, the Child and Youth Advocate Act, and Bill 26, the Traffic Safety Amendment Act, 2011, and as per the Order Paper.

On Tuesday, November 29, in the afternoon for second reading Bill 27, the Appropriation (Supplementary Supply) Act, 2011 (No. 2), and in Committee of the Whole Bill 23, the Land Assembly Project Area Amendment Act, 2011, and Bill 24, the Health Quality Council of Alberta Act, and as per the Order Paper. November 29 in the evening in Committee of the Whole bills 24 and 25 and as per the Order Paper.

On Wednesday, November 30, in the afternoon in Committee of the Whole Bill 21, the Election Amendment Act, 2011; Bill 25, the Child and Youth Advocate Act; Bill 27, the Appropriation (Supplementary Supply) Act, 2011 (No. 2); and as per the Order Paper. In the evening in Committee of the Whole bills 21, 25, and 22; third readings on bills 23, 24, 25, 26; and as per the Order Paper. On Thursday, December 1, in the afternoon for third re ading bills 21, 22, 26, 27, and as per the Order Paper. Speaker’s Ruling Challenging the Chair The Speaker: Hon. members, we have several items to deal with.

First of all, I want to provide some clarification. I would draw members’ attention to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, 2009, page 497, where there is a

section that says: Role of the Speaker during Question Period. The Speaker has implicit discretion and authority to rule out of order any question posed during Question Period if satisfied that it is in contravention of House rules of order, decorum and procedure. In ruling a question out of order, the Chair may suggest that it be rephrased in order to make it acceptable to the

November 24, 2011 Alberta Hansard 1367 House. Or, the Speaker may recognize another Member to pose the next question. This afternoon, when the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar rose on a question, I ruled it out of order. I would draw all members’ attention to Beauchesne’s

section 410(17), which clearly states that “ministers may not be questioned with respect to party responsibilities.” Then I would draw all members’ attention to House of Commons Procedure and Practice , second edition, page 504, which states that questions s hould not be asked which “concern internal party matters, or party or election expenses.” 2:50 To the hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar, I did what I am supposed to do, and I provided two citations.

As you challenged the chair and said that it is within the rules, would you by Monday let me know where the citation is, in all of the books, that says that you can do what you did? That would be important because I like to expand my education base, and I’m always open to hearing. I know exactly what Hansard said.

Speaker’s Ruling Questions outside Government Responsibility The Speaker: Number two, there was a possibility because – a number of members here today looked rather strangely at me when I allowed the question from Calgary-Varsity to proceed, a question which had to do with an agreement between Canada and the European Union. Neither the hon. Member for Calgary- Varsity or the minister in question made it absolutely clear that in order for this agreement to proceed, it needs the support of the provinces. That’s one of the conditions of the European Union.

I met with the European Union on this matter, and they made it very, very clear, so that’s why I let that question go through. Some people said that that ap pears to be ultra vires and not within the mandate of the House, but it is. It is within the Constitution of Canada, the administrative procedures in part of this country, so that’s why that question was allowed.

Speaker’s Ruling Unsolicited Items on Members’ Desks The Speaker: Number three, every time I allow members to put things on their desks, I get not es from other members saying: “Why should a pin, which shows the flags of Canada and the United States on it and has Keystone pipeline written on it, be allowed to be put on the desks of members of this Assembly? Speaker, don’t you know that not everybody agrees? Don’t you know that this is highly sensitive in some quarters?” Listen, this has happened with other, previous things and at other times before.

I’ve allowed, you know, the ribbons for prostate cancer and for other things to be put on the desks, but it seems that in way more than half of these cases I then get notes from other members saying: why is that on my desk? Maybe the way we should approach this is that boxes can be put outside the door, as you come into the Assembly, and if members want to pick up a ribbon to support the cause of breast cancer or the cause of prostate cancer or, you know, a war against poverty, you pick it up and bring it in, and th en we won’t have this issue, which seems to cause heartburn for some members.

You know, the greater thing is just to allo w common sense to prevail, but I think we’ll go with the other one. Privilege Misleading the House The Speaker: Okay. We’ve had a situation dealing with a question of privilege that’s been around for a while. The chair has listened to the arguments presen ted on the purported question of privilege brought by the Member for Edmonton-Strathcona and is prepared to rule on the matter.

Notice of the purported question of privilege was provided by the Member for Edmonton-Strathcona to the Speaker’s office on Monday, October 24, 2011, at 10: 58 a.m., so the notice provision of Standing Order 15(2) was met. The notice was provided in the Assembly that day by the Member for Edmonton-Strathcona and was deferred until the fall sitting resumed on November 21 pursuant to standing orders 15(3) and 15(4). The chair will have some comments later on the question of whether this matter was raised at the earliest opportunity as required under Standing Order 15(6).

The alleged facts giving rise to this purported question of privilege are involved, so the chair will attempt to summarize them concisely. In essence, the Member fo r Edmonton-Strathcona argued on November 21 at pages 1205 to 1207 of Alberta Hansard for that day that the Member for Edmonton-Mill Creek deliberately misled the Assembly when he answered certain questions during question period on November 30, December 1, and December 2, 2010, almost a year ago. At that time the member was Minister of Health and Wellness.

Without replicating the Hansard excerpt for those days, the then minister was responding to questions about a PowerPoint presentation dated July 2010 entitled Alberta’s Health Legislation: Moving Forward, ta bled in the Assembly on Novem- ber 30, 2010, as Sessional Paper 450/2010. At the start of the fall sitting on October 24, 2011, the Member for Edmonton-Strathcona tabled an additional document, which appears to be a briefing from the Minister of Health and Wellness dated May 2010 entitled, and I quote, Minister’s Report, end quote, and which stands as Sessional Paper 486/2011.

As the chair understands it, the argument is th at the May 20 document was the source for the July 2010 document as opposed to the source being views of Albertans as indicated by the then minister on November 30, 2010, at page 1691 of Alberta Hansard for that day. Deliberately misleading the Assembly is an extremely serious allegation, which seldom satisfies the test for constituting a prima facie question of privilege. Many of the authorities were cited by the Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, including the chair’s ruling of November 7, 2007, which includes references to several leading authorities.

Briefly, deliberately misleading the Assembly is a form of contempt of the Assembly, which is treated as a breach of parliamentary privilege. The test that has been adopted in this Assembly and in the Canadian House of Commons actually originated in New Zealand. The test as articulated by David McGee, former Clerk of the House of Representativ es in New Zealand , is found in the third edition of his book Parliamentary Practices in New Zealand, 2005, at pages 653 to 654.

There are three elements to be established when it is alleged that a member is in contempt by reason of a statement that the member has made: the statement must, in fact, have been misleading; it must be established that the member making the statement knew at the time the statement was made that it was incorrect; and, in making it the member must have intended to mislead the House. This test is also referred to in House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, at page 86.

1368 Alberta Hansard November 24, 2011 In this case and based on what the Member for Edmonton-Mill Creek said in this Assembly yesterday, the chair does not believe that any of the three components have been met. It is not clear that the statement was misleading, it has not been established that the Member for Edmonton-Mill Creek knew the statement was incorrect, and there is no evidence that he intended to mislead the Assembly. Accordingly, the chair finds that there is no prima facie question of privilege, so that concludes this matter.

However, with respect to timeliness the chair would like to comment on what is apparent to anyone who has followed this purported question of privilege. First, the statements that are the subject of this application were made almost a year ago. Second, the questions at that time were related to the impact of a document from July 2010. This pur- ported question of privilege relied on what was in a government briefing document from May 2010, nearly one and a half years ago.

The chair wants to point out that an allegation of deliberately misleading the Assembly is one of the most serious matters that could be raised against a member. Allegations of this nature are seldom made out. To do so would require clear and convincing evidence. To resurrect an issue from nearly one year ago based on documents from one and a half years ago, there would have to be overwhelmingly persuasive evidence, which is clearly not the case here. Of course, the chair cannot and would not and will not restrict the ability of members to bring fo rward matters that affect their rights and immunities.

However, the chair would ask members to carefully consider bringing forward matters that call into question the integrity of other members wh en the evidence is less than convincing. The hon. Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo on a point of order. Mr. Boutilier: Mr. Speaker, I was rising on the point of order relative to what the Deputy Premier had raised. The Speaker: That’s why I’m recognizing you. Mr. Boutilier: He had raised a point of order. The Speaker: No. I’m sorry. Mr. Boutilier: He raised the point of order first. The Speaker: Hold on. Government House Leader, did you raise a point of order? Mr.

Hancock: No. The Speaker: No. The Government House Leader has not raised a point of order. Mr. Boutilier: Mr. Speaker, since the Deputy Premier did not raise a point of order, I have no point of order. The Speaker: I’m impressed with the gentlemen that we have here. Some might refer to this as an old boys’ club, but let’s not get carried away here on that one. Ms Blakeman: And they’d be right. The Speaker: I agree with you, Edmonton-Centre.

I can assure you that I would never want to do that. 3:00 head: Orders of the Day head: Government Bills and Orders Second Reading Bill 23 Land Assembly Project Area Amendment Act, 2011 [Adjourned debate November 22: Mr. Johnson] The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Infrastructure. Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased and honoured to resume debate on this important piece of legislation for Albertans. When I became Minister of Infrastructure, the Premier gave me the mandate to review the Land Assembly Project Area Act to address concerns about the act that landowners were raising.

The amend- ments I introduced in first reading Monday address those concerns. The concerns that we heard from Albertans were to give more power to property owners, to landowners. To draw a picture of what thes e amendments do, I have to begin with some history. Starting in the 1970s government began purchasing land for major projects such as the Edmonton and Calgary ring roads. The process that we used for those purchases was the restricted development area regulations, which put limits, of course, on development within the area that we were looking at for those large projects.

Under the RDAs landowners had very limited rights; in particular, th e government was not required to notify or consult landowners. The government was also not required to make decisions with in a reasonable amount of time on what land would be affected by these potential pr ojects. Govern- ment also decided when we were going to purchase the land. In other words, we decided when the landowners were going to be compensated for their land. Mr.

Speaker, the ring roads did get built, but the process of acquiring land was not as clear as it could have been, and it gave property owners very minimal control, power, or input into the process. That’s why the previous Minister of Infrastructure – actually, it was the minister previous to the previous Minister of Infrastructure – introduced the Land Assembly Project Area Act three years ago. It was intended for property owners to have a clearer process when the Alberta government needed to buy or acquire land for very large-scale, long-term projects for the province.

It’s important to empha size that this act, LAPAA, as I will refer to it, does not give the government any powers or abilities that it didn’t have before . The government, of course, has always had the ability to acquire land for projects like this, projects for the public good, and governments of all levels have always had the ability to rest rict development through various mechanisms, including zoning at the municipal level. The critical piece of Bill 23, of course, is that it ensures that landowners are notified, consulted, and fairly compensated for their land.

There are many good aspects to LAPAA as it originally sat, but it can certainly be better, and it needs to be better. Property owners expect and deserve nothing less from their government. We’ve heard a lot of comments about the legislation over the last two years from stakeholders, various groups around the province, and, most importantly, individual landowners. The four main concerns we’ve heard, Mr. Speaker, relate to these areas. First, there’s confusion about what kinds of projects fall under this act.

The second is that there were concerns about whether Albertans are going to be able to get fair compensation when a LAPAA project is considered and if they will have access to the Expropriation Act and all the heads of compensation, the principles that we use to compensate landowners

November 24, 2011 Alberta Hansard 1369 that lie within the Expropriation Act. The third is that there was concern about access to the courts, making sure that landowners have access to the courts in terms of disagreement on compensation and disagreement on enforcement orders. The fourth were concerns that Albertans raised about the penalties under the act. Some saw them as too heavy handed. The amendments I introduced this week, Mr. Speaker, address all four of these areas and go right to the heart of the concerns that Albertans have been raising with my colleagues and I and our Premier.

They meet the Premier’s commitment to ensure that the three Cs are in place: consultation, compensation, and access to the courts. At the heart of Bill 23 is the government’s commitment to ensuring that power is in the hands of the landowner. Our focus with these amendments is to ensure th at landowners are consulted, to ensure that they are compensated fairly, and to ensure that they have full access to the courts. By passing this act, we would be giving Albertans as many options as possible if their land is needed for a major water or transportation corridor project.

The act gives landowners certainty of purchase. It ensures that the government will consult with them. It ensures that a court process is in place to handle disputes that arise over either land value or enforcement. Landowners will be protected by this legislation and the full range of legislation already in place like the Expropriation Act. The Expropriation Act has always been available to Albertans, but now it is much more clearly part of the legislation and linked within this amendment. The amendments give the landowne rs the right to kick-start the expropriation, which is very significant.

This important change for property owners, this reverse expropriation, or the ability to trigger, is a very important piece when we’re looking at projects that may take decades to put together. Mr. Speaker, we have been listening to stakeholders and landowners for two years on this. We’ve heard them say that they want clarity about compensation, so the amendments ensure landowners will have access to all applicable types of compensation under the Expropriation Act. The amendments mean landowners will be able to trigger expropriation, as I said.

We’ve heard landowners say that they want clarity about what is an eligible project under the LAPAA legislation. Bill 23 will ensure more details about the size, scope, and character of potential projects and, maybe more importantly for some Albertans, what is not eligible as a project. Landowners said that they wanted access to the courts. The amendments will give landowners access to a third party to determine compensation when the negotiating parties cannot reach agreement.

Enforcement penalties are reduced, and the landowners, as I’ve said, will have increased access to the courts to contest any enforcement penalties. [Mr. Zwozdesky in the chair] Most of all, landowners want to be consulted during the project planning process. Landowners will be consulted during the planning process. The legislation requires it. More than that, we will be consulting with landowners and othe r stakeholders as we develop the regulations, which will come in coming months. Mr.

Speaker, as you can see by the proposed amendments before you, we have been listening to stakeholders, landowners, and Albertans in general. We have heard what they’ve said. I believe that as we move through second reading debate and Committee of the Whole, it will become evident that we have acted on what we have heard, with little things like the ability to have the first right of refusal on leasing land back when you decide to sell it for a LAPAA project and other pieces of the legislation. Mr.

Speaker, I believe that we’ve addressed the concerns that we’ve heard from Albertans, but now I am very interested to hear what my colleagues and everyone in the Assembly have to say about this act. I encourage them to support it. Thank you. The Acting Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to start my remarks on Bill 23 with this. I would like to offer my congratulations to you, sir, on being chosen the other day for the position of Deputy Chair. I’m sure you will do a very good job. In fact, I think you are emin ently qualified for it.

I heard the other day that you had been refere eing a hockey game if not last week, the week before. I’m sure the hockey game would be much easier than the Legislative Assembly. I wish you very well, sir. I wish you the best. And there were no complaints about the hon. member being a hometown ref. I can assure you of that. Now, I would like to talk about Bill 23 here. I listened to the hon. Member for Athabasca-Redwater and the explanation for the amendments, and I can’t help but think of the people I met from the hon. member’s constituency in the Eckville hall on the Thursday before the Easter long weekend.

Eckville hall, of course, as many people know, was full of landowners from across the province. Many of them travelled for hours to attend this meeting. In fact, the hon. Member for Lacombe-Ponoka was there. I couldn’t understand why he was so anxious to leave so quickly after the meeting ended, but he did. The hon. Member for Innisfail-Sylvan Lake stayed. The hon. Member for St. Albert was there, I believe. The hon. Member for Rocky Mountain House was chairperson of the meeting. At least he was participating in the meeting. It was a very interestin g meeting. I was glad I had the opportunity to attend. 3:10 Mr.

Hinman: What about me? Mr. MacDonald: Oh, I’m sorry. The hon. Member for Calgary- Glenmore was in attendance. The hon. member’s leader, Ms Danielle Smith, was in attendan ce. The hon. Member for Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo was there and, also, the hon. Member for Airdrie-Chestermere, without his goalie gear. He didn’t have his hockey bag with him that evening, Mr. Speaker, but he certainly was following the proceedings with keen interest. Now, I was sitting and listening to some of the comments and some of the questions and th e debate. The hon. Government House Leader was there as well.

There was quite an exchange between himself and another member of the legal profession, Mr. Keith Wilson. I forgot, Mr. Speaker – I apologize – that the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, the hon. Member for Livingstone-Macleod, was in attendance. In fact, he along with the current Minister of Energy were involved in this debate with the member of the legal profession, Mr. Keith Wilson, who had a rather unique exchange with th e Government House Leader. I’m not going to bore you with the details, but if you look at YouTube, you will find it, and it has a lot of hits. It was a very interesting meeting.

I’m sitting, and I’m listening keenly to what the landowners have to say, and I thought to myself: “Well, will this government do the right thing and repeal this legislation? Is this legislation really needed?” I followed, of course, the exchanges, like a lot of other inter- ested political parties, over th e summer between various PC leadership candidates on what they thought not only of Bill 36 but of Bill 50 as well, because they were sort of a package earlier in this term by the government. I th ought that this legislation would

1370 Alberta Hansard November 24, 2011 just be repealed. It wouldn’t be fixed or amended; it would be repealed. We had questions about this initiative right from the start. Many of our questions went unanswered during the course of the original debate, but those questions were also asked by landowners. Here we are months before the next provincial election. Property rights are certainly going to be a big issue. I was over at the AAMD and C luncheon today, and property rights, Mr. Speaker, and Bill 23 were the first topic of discussion at the table that I had the pleasure of sharing at lunch.

They had many , many questions about why this government would do something like this. Why has this government lost its ability to listen? They were not satisfied that this bill was going to fix all of their concerns. They seemed to think that this was more of a public relations exercise to pretend that the issues had been addressed, and let’s get on with the next election and get it over with. I can certainly see why the hon. Member for Fort McMurray- Wood Buffalo would have questions today in question period regarding this matter because it was certainly a subject of interesting conversation.

The government’s approach and the new Premier’s approach to this is still not satisfying many of the landowners. Now, this bill’s political reason, of course, is to fulfill the hon. Premier’s promises from th e leadership debate. I didn’t hear the word – and I could be wrong, Mr. Speaker. I could be totally wrong on this, and if I am, I will certainly stand corrected. But it’s not about reforming this group of land-use bills, which have caused such significant political problems for the government.

I never heard the word “reform”; I heard the word “repeal.” Particularly, this one would be repealed, and we would start over. Well, I suppose you could say this is a legislative mulligan, but I wouldn’t. This is certainly not starting over. Now, across the province – and I can’t stress this enough, Mr. Speaker – people took issue with this series of government initiatives. Again, it’s the Easter long weekend. A lot of people have a lot of things to do. They drove from across the province to hear the debate.

It was really nice, actually, to see democracy at work and to see a rather civil de bate take place on a contentious issue, with anywhere between 500 and 700 people present depending on who you talked to. It was really, from my perspective, interesting to see. It was an experience I will not forget. I also had the experience of attending a meeting this summer in the constituency of the former President of the Treasury Board, the hon. Member for Vermilion-Lloydminster. It was a fine summer evening, good moisture earlier in the summer in the growing season. Hay crops were abundant.

There had been some nice drying weather, and farmers obviously had a lot of work to do to harvest their hay crop, not only harvest it but get it stored as well. At that time of the summer I didn’t think any farmers could stop their harvesting activities to attend a meeting on these land rights bills. But, alas, Mr. Speaker, to my surprise, I pulled into Kitscoty and went to the hall, and the parking lot was full. It was about 9, quarter after 9 in the evening. The parking lot was full. Landowners from all over the area, including Lloydminster, took the time to attend Mr.

Wilson’s meeting and get informed on the real objectives of this government through this legislation. Mr. Speaker, again, it was a sign that democracy is alive and well. This was a very well-atte nded meeting. People were very, very polite. When Mr. Wilson finished his PowerPoint presentation – which I would encourage all hon. members across the way to look at on the Internet. I’m sure you already have, but if you haven’t, I would certainly get you the Internet address because it’s well worth a look. It’s well worth taking the time to go through that PowerPoint slide by slide.

I’m sure if you have any questions that if you phone Mr. Wilson, he would be delighted to answer them because he certainly has a grasp of the issue. You know, Mr. Speaker, I shouldn’ t say this, but I was sitting listening to the presentation by Mr. Wilson, and I was thinking that he would make an excellent representative here in this Legislative Assembly. If he had b een here, maybe he would have been able to convince the government not to pass the bill in the first place. But he’s not here. He certainly was at the hall in Kitscoty, and the citizens listened with interest to what he had to say.

Some of the slides that he had were of great interest. We think about that, that on a nice summer evening when there’s a lot to do on the farm, people are still willing to get their chores done as early as possible and get to a public meeting to hear how their rights as landowners may be affected if this law remains. 3:20 I can give the government some credit for backpedalling or backtracking a little bit on this, but again I thought we were going to repeal the legislation and we were going to start over. There are standing committees. Th ey’re all-party committees of this Legislative Assembly. Mr.

Speaker, we could pick any one of those committees and put them to work by going out and hearing exactly what Mr. Wilson and his group heard from citizens and bringing that information back to this Assembly and to the minister. Now, I would be real pleased to get an opportunity to go to Drayton Valley and attend a meeting out there. I know it’s a big issue out there, as does the hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore. I don’t know if his leader has had an opportunity to get out there or not. I know it’s a big issue in Drayton Valley because people have phoned me and said: “What’s with this crowd?

What’s with this government? Are they taking their right to govern for granted?” My response was: “ You’ll have to ask them. You’ll have to ask them why they feel these bills are so necessary.” Specifically, with Bill 23, Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, the idea here is to mend an extremely controversial bill that was seen to limit, and in my view ha s limited, landowners’ rights and controls over their land.

We know there’s an election coming in the next four or five months, and with this bill all the Progressive Conservative candidates – I don’t know if I can say that word in here anymore after question period – in the next election, all 87 of them, will be able to say: “Oh, no. We listened. We turned around on this. Of course, we had Bill 23, which satisfied all of your concerns.” I’m confident that people who attend election forums are not going to be satisfied with Bill 23.

Certainly, we hear that it’s going to clarify and limit the government’s restrictions on privately held land for the purposes of future development. That was seen to exist in the original act. I had a gentleman in the escalator at the Shaw Conference Centre ask me, “Is it true that this legislation can freeze activity on my land until my grandchildren have retired?” I asked him, “How old are your grandchildren?” He said: “They’re very young. They’re just entering elementary school.” I think he had it, hon. members. He had this scoped out, as the kids would say.

Now, we also with this legislation are placing an advisory, a minimum 15-year time frame betw een land assembly and project construction for most projects. I understand that maybe the hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre can clarify this. Is five years only for water projects? Ms Blakeman: Yeah. Mr. MacDonald: Yes. Okay.

November 24, 2011 Alberta Hansard 1371 More rapid projects would continue to use conventional exploration. Certainly, whenever we’re talking about land use – and here’s the hon. Minister of Energy, who was one of the star participants in Eckville the Thursday before the Easter long weekend at the debate. I’m glad here’s here. Now, whenever we look at planning, you know, and long -term planning, it’s very important. I would use this as an example. The B.C. government is looking at – and I could be wrong, Mr.

Speaker – a rather large hydroelectricity development in and around Pouce Coupe, a little bit south down in the Peace River valley, a dam that would create a reservoir that could be up to, I think, 80 kilometres long. It’s a large volume of water, which could potentially produce over 2,000 megawatts of electricity. Now, that’s certainly going to affect the fine folks in the Peace River district on the Alberta side. It’s going to have issues with oil sands development, with water use.

A t some time maybe this government is planning a run-of-the-river development around the Slave River, but this is an example of why we need to do good planning. This House, Mr. Speaker, as you’re aware, passed, I believe it was, the Dunvegan Hydro Development Act, where we could have run-of-the-river electricity generation around the Dunvegan area. Of course, if we were to put further dams on the Peace River, how would it affect that potential project, which was of course set up by

an act of this Legislativ e Assembly? Those are examples of where planning comes into place not only in our own neighbour - hoods in our own province but also with our neighbours, in this case the province of British Columbia. I’m sure the hon. Minister of Energy is providing the opposition out there with election tips. I’m sure he is as that fixed -date election gets closer and closer. Certainly, the right to compensa- tion and legal recourse equal to rights under expropriation with preferential leaseback offered to original owners is , as the hon. member suggested, in this bill.

That certainly was an issue that many questions were focused on in Eckville. I don’t know how much time I have left, Mr. Speaker, but I would like to ask the hon. member if Mr. Wilson was consulted when this amendment was considered and drafted. If I could have a response to that question in the course of debate, I would really appreciate that. Thank you again, Mr. Speaker. It’s going to be very interesting to hear how this amendment act proceeds through the L egislative Assembly as promoted and sponsored by the Minister of Infrastructure. Thank you. The Acting Speaker: Thank you, hon. member.

The Minister of Environment and Water. Mrs. McQueen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to speak today in support of the amendments the government has introduced through Bill 23, the Land Assembly Project Area Amendment Act, 2011. I want to congratulate the hon. member for bringing this forward. It’s the first step, I would say, in addressing property rights. I was very proud today when the Premier announced that I will chair and the hon. Member for Livingstone -Macleod will vice - chair a committee to go and do exactly what the Premier committed to when she was running for leadership.

That is to go and listen to Albertans with regard to issues around property taxes and concerns that they might have. I’m very much looking forward to doing that, and in particular having a conversation where I and other MLAs and members of the task force will have the opportunity to listen and to bring back to our government what we have heard with regard to property rights in Alberta and the feelings and thoughts of Albertans. I’m very much looking forward to that. As you know, Mr. Speaker, one of the most important responsibilities we have as elected officials is to ensure Albertans’ rights are being respected.

I am pleased that the amendments in this bill, introduced by our government, show that respect and give more power to landowners. Property owners deserve nothing less, and they expect nothing less from their government. These amendments are an important first step to fulfilling our Premier’s commitment to addressing concerns about the rights of landowners. They offer real benefits to landowners.

First, the amendments provide clarity; second, the amendments give landowners as many options as possible; and finally, the amendments give full access to all applicable categories of compensation under the Expropriation Act. As I mentioned, clarity is a key component of the amendments. Government will be required by law to notify and consult individual property owners when a major long -term project is being considered. Government must also decide within two years which properties will be part of the project. Government must purchase an individual’s property when the landowner chooses to sell.

This is a transparent and open process, one that Albertans have every right to expect. 3:30 Another benefit contained in the amendments is c hoice. Landowners can now sell their land to the government. They can also sell their land to the government and lease it back until the project is ready to begin. Finally, they can sell their property to a third party or leave it to family members in the ir will. This approach gives landowners the power to choose when to sell their land to government.

If a landowner wants to sell but is not happy with the price the government is offering, the landowner will have the option to allow the courts to decide what price should be paid. This gives landowners the power to access all applicable categories of compensation for their land under the Expropriation Act as well as the courts. I am also pleased that the government will pay landowners’ court costs. As I said at the outset, Mr.

Speaker, Albertans had a lot to say about the act as it currently stands, but the amendments tabled in this House by the Minister of Infrastructure provide some much- needed answers to landowners. Today I’m happy to say that the act is s ignificantly improved. It not only reflects the concerns raised by Albertans, but it contains very real and very tangible benefits to our landowners. We listened, and with this act we are delivering. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Acting Speaker: Thank you. Standing Order 29(2)(

a) is available on Bill 23, the Land Assembly Project Area Amendment Act, 2011, pursuant to the previous speaker’s comments. Mr. Chase: A clarification to the hon. Member for Drayton Valley-Calmar, who is currently the Minister of Environment and Water. Did you say that yourself and, I believe, the Member for Livingstone-Macleod had gone out and consulted, and if that is so, what was the nature of the consultation? How many public forums and meetings were held? If I am wrong, then when is this consultation planned? Mr