Alberta Hansard — 22 March 1984, Afternoon sitting (14:30) (Legislature 20, Session 2)

19840322

Alberta — Debates (Hansard)

March 22, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 97 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Thursday, March 22, 1984 2:30 p.m. [The House met at 2:30 p.m.] PRAYERS [Mr. Speaker in the Chair] head: READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS MR. SPEAKER: Yesterday the hon. Member for Edmonton Norwood mentioned a petition he had brought in the day before, and I said that I would get some advice with regard to it and report back to the House. I am advised that the petition does not conform to the usual practices and rules of the Assembly. head: TABLING RETURNS AND REPORTS MR. CHAMBERS: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to file the aircraft manifest with respect to Executive Council air travel for the calendar year 1983. MR. SPEAKER: I am pleased to be able to table the annual report of the Chief Electoral Officer for the year ended Decem ber 31, 1983, and also the 1983 annual report of Alberta Han sard. head: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure to introduce to you, and through you to members of this Legislative Assembly, 16 students from the adult education group of the La Crete school, some 500 miles north of Edmonton.

Accompanying the students are Rosabel Fast and Anne Boehlig, Anne's hus band, Henry, is the driver. They've been in Edmonton since Monday and have visited the University of Alberta, the North ern Alberta Institute of Technology, the Glenrose hospital, the Edmonton Journal, and tomorrow they will visit the Muttart Conservatory before returning to La Crete. I ask that they rise and receive the welcome of this Assembly. MR. SCHMID: Mr. Speaker, I'm especially pleased today to be able to introduce to you grades 5 and 6 of the bilingual Ukrainian program of Holyrood school.

They are accompanied by their teacher, Helene Magus, and by interested parents Pau line Tysowski, Bill Fodchuk, Gladys Nault, Barbara Rachan- sky, and Donna Lysenko. I should say that Lisa Nault broke her wrist playing hockey. She tells me that she's recovering. Of special interest, Mr. Speaker, is that this program has been most successful for a number of years now. Not only that, but a survey that has been done has established that students in bilingual programs — Ukrainian and others — have done extremely well in the overall curriculum of the school system.

I'm therefore very happy that these students live up to the exhortation of the great poet of the Ukraine, Taras Shevchenko: Uchitesia braty moyi! Dumayte, chytayte, I chuzhomu nauchaytes, Svoho ne tsuraytes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MRS. LeMESSURIER: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to introduce to you, and through you to members of this Assem bly, 21 students from the Alberta Vocational Centre. These students are studying current affairs, and I hope they enjoy their session this afternoon. They are accompanied by their teacher Ann Nikolai and are sitting in the members gallery.

Would you please rise, ladies and gentlemen, and would the Assembly please give them a round of applause. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure today to introduce to you and to members of the Assembly some 20 alert and conscientious students from Grant MacEwan College, who are here to study the practical side of political science. They're from the attractive new Jasper Place campus of Grant MacEwan College, which is the western anchor of the Edmonton Glenora constituency. They're in the members gal lery, and their group leader is Indira Singh.

I ask that they all rise at this time and receive the welcome of the Assembly. MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for Edmonton Avonmore has introduced some grades 5 and 6 students from one of the very best schools in Edmonton. I know, because it's the one my son attends. I would now like to introduce some grades 5 and 6 students from another one of the very best schools in Edmonton. Seated in the public gallery are 10 grades 5 and 6 students from Alex Taylor school in Edmonton High lands. They are accompanied by Frances Olynyk.

I would like to ask that they rise to receive the warm welcome of the Assem bly. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD MR. NOTLEY: If I may, Mr. Speaker, just on a point of order. Before posing the first question, I'd like to extend to both the hon. Minister of Social Services and Community Health and the hon. Member for Highwood a hearty welcome back to the House after what must have been an extremely harrowing . . . [applause] I'm sure all members will pay tribute to the crew of that airline for the excellent job in saving the lives of those passengers this morning. Lubicon Lake Land Claim MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to direct the first question to the hon. Minister responsible for Native Affairs and ask whether he can inform the House of current policy worked out in response to the latest federal government proposal for a solution to the Lubicon Lake land claims settlement issue. MR. PAHL: Mr. Speaker, I believe the hon. member is responding to a press report that the federal Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs proposed in a letter to me last month. The letter in itself does not represent a response or a proposal.

The actions of this government are governed by our obligations under the Natural Resources Transfer Agreement of 1930, whereby, with the presentation of a validated land claim by the federal government, the province would assess that claim and respond to it. But I could report to the Assembly that to this

98 ALBERTA HANSARD March 22, 1984 point, the federal government has not presented us with a val idated land claim. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. What response has the minister given to the federal minister's letter of February 17, 1984, urging the province to move forward with the proposals set out to this provincial government by the federal government in a letter from the federal minister dated, I believe, December 14, 1983? MR. PAHL: Mr. Speaker, I had a discussion with the federal minister on Monday this week, responding in an informal way.

I will be following that discussion with a letter in the very near future. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. Specifically, what response is the government of Alberta making at this stage to the proposal that as a pre liminary measure some 25 square miles be set aside, with the mineral rights, as proposed in 1940? MR. PAHL: Mr. Speaker, I feel I should probably write the letter before I share it with the House, or the member specif ically. But I would go back to the position of the government, which follows the requirements of the Natural Resources Trans fer Agreement.

In that sense, we are no further with the federal government than were our predecessors in 1940. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, the question is whether we will be any further after the minister's letter. However, could I ask the minister whether this government looks with favour upon the minister's proposal of the 25 square miles being set aside as a preliminary measure? MR. PAHL: Mr. Speaker, it's very difficult to respond to that, because we really have no basis for assessing that proposal.

As I mentioned in the early part of the inquiry, it will be necessary for the federal government to provide a validated land claim. It's on that basis that we would make an assessment as to whether the 25 square miles is more or less or whatever. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question so that I understand the minister's answer. Is the minister then ruling out the federal minister's proposal as an interim or preliminary measure? Must it in fact be an all-or-nothing situation? MR. PAHL: Again, Mr. Speaker, I really hesitate to share with the House or the hon. member a letter that I've not written.

However, I would simply indicate that the proposal the hon. member is advancing, I guess on behalf of the federal government, really doesn't represent a legitimate proposal or a forward step with respect to the negotiations on the Lubicon land claim settlement. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary. MR. NOTLEY: If I recollect his comments, I believe the min ister indicated that he talked to the federal minister this week.

During the course of that conversation, did he indicate the position of the government of Alberta with respect to Mr. Munro's proposal for a preliminary agreement? If he did, what did he tell the federal minister? MR. PAHL: Mr. Speaker, I'll answer the latter part of that first. I told the minister that I would be responding to his letter in a more formal way shortly. MR. NOTLEY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm afraid the people in the Lubicon Band will have to wait another 40 years. Health Study — Pincher Creek Area MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct the second question to the hon. Minister of the Environment.

During the second week of January, the Acid Deposition Research Program brought a number of people together at their conference in Banff. Could the minister advise the Assembly whether the doctors who were at that conference subsequently presented the government with a proposal for an independent health study of the Pincher Creek area? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, the Acid Deposition Research Program, a group of 23 medical scientists from throughout North America, did meet in Banff to discuss a research program with regard to the human health effects of acid deposition.

As far as I'm aware, the scientists requested that their specific report with regard to their discussion would require their review and approval before it is released. I have not yet received a formal copy of the report prepared by the scientists at that meeting. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the hon. minister. Does the government now have any plans to launch either an independent or government health study of the Pincher Creek area? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, that matter is certainly under serious consideration by the government.

A number of depart ments, including the Department of Social Services and Com munity Health, have had input. It's under serious consideration, and I expect an announcement in the near future. MR. NOTLEY: That announcement wouldn't come tomorrow by any chance, would it, Mr. Minister? Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the minister whether or not, in the consideration of this study, the government intends to ensure that there will be local Pincher Creek input into the terms of reference of any health study? MR. BRADLEY: Mr.

Speaker, the matter of a study or the nature of what will take place is under review, and those matters have not been finalized. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Is the minister able to be a little more definitive as to when this will be finalized? In particular, could the minister advise what work, if any, has already been done on detailing the terms of reference for such a study? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, I can only advise that any conclusions have not at this moment been concluded, and I expect to have an announcement made by the government in the near future. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question. The minister indicated that he was consulting his colleague the Minister of Social Services and Community Health. However, what other route is the government taking, at this stage, in order to develop the terms of reference for such a study? Is

March 22, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 99 some way to allow local people to have input in the terms of reference one of the factors being considered? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, the whole question of a study or what might take place is under consideration. I've already indicated that there have been no conclusions made on these matters and that there'll be an announcement in the near future. MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, one final supplementary question to the minister, with respect to the process by which the terms of reference are being considered. What is that process?

Is it going to be a totally in-house process, or will it involve some reference to the community in particular? MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, I think I've answered the ques tion already. Mortgage Company Investigation MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, my question is a follow-up to yesterday's questions to the hon. Attorney General. It relates to the minister's answer yesterday as to why Mr. de Rappard was not charged as a result of his signing a prospectus on November 29 when a known financial report of September 10, 1979, was not included.

My question is: why were charges not proceeded with in this case but proceeded with against Mr. Don Reed, of Reed Communications Inc., who was charged and convicted for filing a false and incomplete prospectus with the Alberta Securities Commission? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to give the hon. member some further insight into the processes of the law officers of the Crown. Because of the way in which the question was phrased, using a specific name, I should preface my response today.

I would not remark upon the question in one way or another in respect of the fact that the RCMP said that, in their view, there were five people who might have been charged. I would not either confirm or deny that, Mr. Speaker, because that would begin to get into the potential question of identity. So in responding to the hon. leader on that point yesterday and today, I want it clear that I make no comment. I have no difficulty in responding to the question with respect to Mr. Reed, because that was a matter recorded in due process in the courts. I don't know by what process Mr.

Reed decided he should plead guilty, but one can assume it would be on the advice of his legal counsel. If the hon. leader of the Independents is suggesting that charges laid under a particular

section of the Criminal Code must in all circumstances relate to the same facts, then I think a moment's refection would tell him that that simply could not be so. All cases are different. All cases have their own facts. In the case of the Dial situation, as I indicated in January, at the time the decision was made, it was the unanimous opinion of law officers of the Crown that not only should no charges be laid but, in the words of one of the senior law officers of the Crown to me at the time, "We don't even have a case". Those were his words. In concluding this response, Mr.

Speaker, perhaps it would be useful to note that one of the members of the RCMP inves tigation team has since that time also publicly acknowledged that although in many, many cases, of which this was one, recommendations with respect to a prosecution are made, the police accept the long-understood principle in all jurisdictions similar to ours, that the actual decision is made by Crown attorneys. They accept that, and any suggestion that that is extraordinary in any way would of course be wrong. It happens probably hundreds, if not thousands, of times in each year. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr.

Speaker, in light of the minister's answer, and yesterday's answer as well, I ask one further ques tion for clarification of information. Is it the Attorney General's position in this matter that the signing of a prospectus, stating that it is full, plain, and complete, is in fact full, plain, and complete when a damaging financial report is not included? MR. SPEAKER: Is the hon. leader asking for an opinion about the adequacy of a prospectus? MR. R. SPEAKER: No, Mr. Speaker, I'm not asking for the adequacy of the prospectus.

I'm asking for the clarification of an answer that was given yesterday by the hon. minister. I believe the minister supported that point of view, and I wanted to be assured that that was the minister's point of view with regard to the prospectus. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, the hon. leader is in fact asking me to interpret a document. Briefly, I could simply state to him — although technically it is not a matter for the question period — that what is involved in all such cases is not simply taking the wording of the

section and then drawing conclusions on one part of it. The hon. leader will have noted, because he wouldn't have asked the question without looking at the

section of the Criminal Code in question, that it is of the essence of that particular offence that the publication be made knowingly by any person who is to be charged. That is absolutely essential. Without it, no Crown attorney would ever consider proceeding. Mount Allan Olympic Ski Site MRS. KOPER: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct my question to the Minister of Tourism and Small Business. It is in regard to the progress being made in preparation for the '88 Olympics. My question relates specifically to the development of the Mount Allan site for the downhill events.

Could the minister please advise the Assembly of the status of the Mount Allan master plan? DR. BUCK: Tell us about the snow. MR. MARTIN: Tell us about the snow. MR. ADAIR: Pardon me? DR. BUCK: Tell us about the snow. MR. ADAIR: Snow news is good news. [laughter] Mr. Speaker, if I may respond to the question. The master plan is on course and nearing completion, and I assume it should be presented to me by about mid-April. MRS. KOPER: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Are the nec essary approvals in place and, if they are, will construction begin on time? Are we still on target? MR. ADAIR: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I assume that the approvals the hon. member is referring to are the various approvals we have in place from the FIS — that's the Federation Interna tionale de Ski — the Canadian Ski Association, and the Olym pic association. They are all in place. They are the technical approvals, as I have stated before. The final approval will only

100 ALBERTA HANSARD March 22, 1984 come after the actual runs have been cleared and tested by physically skiing them. MRS. KOPER: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. In view of the environmental concerns often discussed in the House, and spe cifically the bighorn sheep matter, can the minister please tell the House if these issues have been resolved to his satisfaction? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, it's my understanding that the master planning consultants have met with the environmental committee headed by Mr. Mill, and also with the technical committee.

To the best of my knowledge, they have reached a conclusion that is satisfactory to both the consultant and the technical committee for presentation to me, as to the sheep problem and any other environmental problems that may occur with the construction of the site on Mount Allan. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Can the minister indicate to the Assembly if he or someone in the department was doing any monitoring as to the amount of snow that was available on Mount Allan at the same time the Olym pics were going on in Yugoslavia?

I know there was snow earlier in the year, but was there any snow at the time the Olympics were on? MR. ADAIR: As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, there was snow on Mount Allan. It's hidden to some degree by the trees. [laugh ter] But I did want to point out that it was over three feet deep at the time the Sarajevo games were going on. DR. BUCK: The problem was, the rocks were six feet high. Mr. Speaker, what projections has the minister's department done as to what the approximate projected costs would be to have snow equipment put in place? Will that be an ongoing cost after the Olympics are held?

Will we have to be making snow all the time on Mount Allan if we're going to be using it as a winter facility? MR. ADAIR: The plan, Mr. Speaker, is to . . . [interjections] Pardon me? The plan is to install machine snowmaking for Mount Allan for two purposes: one, to assist the Olympics; then obviously to be there as a legacy to the recreation skiers of not only this province but whoever may use that hill after. Obviously it will be used and, at this particular point, on the best information I have, I assume that it will be used to complement the natural snowfall. Now, two things.

I have to go back, if I might, Mr. Speaker, to part of the comment that was made by the hon. member a little earlier. Some of the photographs or films were taken at the top of Mount Allan, where in fact there was very little snow, and that was the only place you could actually land. I might suggest, too, that we have developed a bit of a problem with some people flying over in helicopters and taking pictures and scaring the sheep. I would hope that they might not do that, in the interests of the health of the sheep. [laughter] I'm serious — on behalf of the sheep and those flying over. Mr.

Speaker, truthfully, to answer the question, in essence the snowmaking is going in to complement the natural snowfall and will be used on an ongoing basis after the Olympics are over. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, the second part of my question was: are there any projected costs, and what would be the ongoing costs — just a ballpark figure — after the Olympics are over and the snowmaking facilities are in place? What would be the ongoing costs to maintain that snow? MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, I don't have those figures with me at the present time. They will be a part of the master planning process.

When that is completed, it will be made public, and I would be prepared to discuss it at that time. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary on this topic. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, can the minister indicate what prob lems he or the department sees in trying to keep the snow where they want to, in light of the fact that there are high-velocity winds up where the runs will start. MR. ADAIR: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure that there are in fact high-velocity winds up where the ski runs start.

I should point out that the men's downhill for the Olympics will start above the tree line, and only for the period of the Olympics will that particular piece be in place. After that the recreation skiing will take place below the tree line, where there is very little weather-vaning to indicate any continuous amount of high winds. When you're on a mountain, obviously there are high winds on some occasions. We've had them all over the world. In that case there are days when, to some degree, you may not be able to ski. But in the normal process, the winds are not a major problem to the Mount Allan site.

Timber Harvesting — Hidden Creek MR. LEE: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the hon. Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Given that the integrated management plan for the Upper Oldman watershed region has not yet been finalized, can the minister indicate why the government is allowing the harvest of timber in Hidden Creek to proceed, when such a harvest may in fact jeopardize the plan's policy options? MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr. Speaker, certainly it was never the intention of the integrated management planning concept to prevent our forestry industry from continuing its operations.

The recognized procedure and approach in matters of this nature is that we operate under the existing Eastern Slopes land use policy. That policy specifies that in areas designated as having a multiple use, timber harvesting may occur. That in fact is the designation of the Hidden Creek area, the 6.3 percent of that watershed area that will be harvested. Moreover, Mr.

Speaker, I can advise hon. members that in this particular instance there has been a full referral process, involving the fish and wildlife section, the forest land use sec tion, and the recreation area of government being canvassed on this matter as well. In addition, there has been a very exten sive consultative process, with interested parties of the public expressing divergent points of view, in some instances, with respect to this matter.

Finally, there was some preliminary discussion with the planning team involved in the integrated management plan, and the assessment given was that this would not be in conflict with the recommendations of that planning team. MR. LEE: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. As the Upper Oldman basin is the only basin in southern Alberta that has not yet been logged, how does the minister expect to satisfy the public's demand for recreational and wilderness areas in southern Alberta?

March 22, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 101 MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr. Speaker, in response to that query, the fact of the matter is that vast areas in southern Alberta are available for recreation purposes. There are of course all those areas that are designated as prime protection areas, where no timber harvesting will occur, and that includes some 500,000 acres south of the Canmore area in and of itself. As well, the Kananaskis Provincial Park area has been set aside — the Waterton park area, the Banff National Park area.

There are a number of watersheds in the area that will not be harvested for timber purposes, including the Scarpe, Jutland, and Ptolemy areas, to name but a few. MR. LEE: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister indicate what specific studies have been completed that prove that the watershed will not in fact be damaged as a result of the Hidden Creek logging permit? MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr. Speaker, one must acknowledge, in the first instance, that studies and assessments can never prove anything in particular. The actual events that will unfold are disclosed as those events occur.

Having said that, I do want to indicate to members of the Assembly that there has been a very careful assessment by the government as to any possibly adverse impact and, after that careful scrutiny, the government is satisfied that there will not be any adverse impact. MR. LEE: Final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Given the wide interest by the public in this issue in recent months, has the minister considered holding public hearings specifically into the question of the development of the Hidden Creek valley? MR. ZAOZIRNY: As I mentioned, Mr.

Speaker, a very exten sive consultative process has occurred and has been occurring. The one inevitable result of the delay by way of a public hearing would of course be to ensure that some jobs in our forestry industry might well be jeopardized. It should be noted that the forestry industry is the second largest payer of salaries in the province of Alberta. Some 15 percent of salaries . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I perceived the question to have been one to elicit whether there were going to be any public hearings. DR. BUCK: Save that for the constituency association meet ings, John. MR. ZAOZIRNY: Mr.

Speaker, bearing that caveat in mind, the consultative process has occurred. We will strike a balance between good environmental protection and ensuring the future of our forest industry. Bingo Regulations MR. SHRAKE: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Attorney General. In the city of Calgary the mayor and city council are struggling to hold back four more applications for bingo barns. Could the Attorney General please advise us when we may get his report on bingo barns — or rather, I'm sorry, bingo reg ulations? MR. NOTLEY: That's right. Let's see some action there. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, there is an existing policy with respect to granting bingo licences. There have been a number of meetings in the city of Calgary specifically dedicated to trying to solve a problem whereby numbers of small com munity leagues are having some difficulty maintaining their part of the bingo market in light of the activities of some larger bingo establishments, popularly known as bingo barns or bingo palaces. It's the only reference in my lifetime that I've ever heard of barns and palaces referred to in the same way.

The response to the hon. member is that what the city of Calgary should do, of course, is apply their zoning laws and their system of municipal permits in whatever way they see fit. If it aids them in some way in coming to their decision to know the . . . MR. SPEAKER: I have a little difficulty with this part of the minister's answer. In fact, it seems as if he's giving the report that the hon. member was inquiring about. School Closure Guidelines MR. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the hon. Minister of Education.

In order to assist the Calgary Board of Education with its very difficult decisions on school closures, has the minister's department determined what minimum enrollment would be required before a school is educationally viable? MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the question is that we have not. The fact of the matter is that different communities have different interests in respect of the education of their children.

For some communities and some parents, that interest leads them toward the kind of program that would require large numbers of students, sophisticated equipment, or wide varieties of course offerings. Some other parents make decisions — some communities make decisions — about what is educationally sound on the basis of a very close relationship between students and teachers.

So it is impossible for the provincial Department of Education to say that for every community in the province, under any circumstances that we might imagine, our definition of what is educationally sound would conform to the interests of the community, the local educationists, the parents, and the students. MR. ANDERSON: Supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, for clarification. Is it then the minister's policy that closures should be determined primarily by the parents in a school district, as he mentioned, on the basis of what they want, educationally, for their children? MR. KING: Essentially, Mr.

Speaker, the answer to that ques tion is, yes. However, it is important to remember that the way we structure the educational system and the government of that system, we do not provide parents the opportunity to make that decision on any occasion whatsoever. They make that decision principally during the course of a campaign for the election of school board trustees and on the day of the election.

It is the responsibility of parents and all other interested members of the community to follow election campaigns very closely and to vote for trustees, not on the basis of a single issue, not on the basis of the issue that is emotional at a given time; it's the responsibility to make a decision about which trustee you will vote for on the basis of a variety of different interests and concerns that are important to education. MR. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary ques tion to the minister.

Is it the policy of the government to encour age the mass closure of schools, as is proposed for Calgary, as opposed to a phase-in that would less negatively affect inner- city communities?

102 ALBERTA HANSARD March 22, 1984 MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, it is definitely not the policy or the practice of the provincial government to support any kind of action which is going to cause traumatic change or dislocation in a school system. It is almost self-evident that the interest of every trustee should be to make decisions and to implement those decisions in a way that will cause as little dislocation and as little disadvantage as possible. I hope that is always the interest uppermost in the minds of trustees. Having said that, Mr. Speaker, it is also true that boards make decisions that I disagree with.

They sometimes make decisions that I think are wrong, ill considered, or too hastily made. None of those beliefs justifies, in my mind, the inter vention of the Minister of Education. If we believe in the local responsibility of elected governments, then we believe in their right to make bad decisions as well as to make the wise decisions which they most often make. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary on this. MR. ANDERSON: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, it might be. [interjec- tions] Following on the heels of the answer the hon. minister just gave, could the minister indicate if he's received a petition from the parents of Clem Gardner school in Calgary, asking for his intervention on the basis of alleged conflicts between the board's moves and the policy of the government with respect to school closures? If so, is he prepared to respond to that petition today? MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, we have received the petition and the accompanying submissions. I have it under very careful consideration.

It is certainly my intention to respond to the people who forwarded it to me. I should also say, as I've said on an earlier occasion in this House, that in my view the responsibility of the Minister of Education is to ratify or to refuse to ratify a decision once the decision is made by the local school board. It would be unfair and inequitable for the minister to intervene in a process before that process has led to a conclusion, given the fact that the ministerial responsibility is to confirm that decision or otherwise when it is made. Vehicle Registration Program DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, my question to the hon.

Solicitor General has to do with issuing automobile licence plates. Is the minister in a position to indicate if he is going to reverse the previous minister's decision to issue licence plates centrally from the government office? Is the minister going to carry on with that policy or change it? DR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the current issuing of new licence plates from a central office was based on the fact that three things are happening concurrently: the issuing of new licence plates, the introduction of a new computer system, and the introduction of staggered issuing of licence plates in the future.

Subsequent to approximately the beginning of May this year, licence plates will once more be issued from the private issuing offices around the province as well as by mail through the central office. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, that's probably the best news we've heard from the new Solicitor General. I'd like to know what the Solicitor General is going to do about the backlog we have in place at this time. For example, I've been informed by private issuers that if I take my certificate down and it's ready to go, the local agent cannot give me my licence plate. It has to be sent.

I've heard of instances where it's taken eight weeks. Can the minister indicate what mech anism is in place so that the people whose licence plates are in the mail or someplace will have some indication that they've paid for the licence plates but have not received them from the government? DR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the member brings up an interesting point, and it is that the eventual end point of the current licence plates, the yellow and black ones, will be on April 30, 1984. There is a history of some errors in the documentation by private issuers, and those errors are showing up with the new computer system.

As a result, there is correspondence back and forth in order to get the information accurately for introduction into the new computer system. It is hoped that in the future, the system will allow instantaneous corrections and avoid these delays. I certainly urge all Albertans who have not yet applied for their new plates to get their applications in, to allow any errors and corrections to be made prior to the termination of the validity of their present plates on April 30, 1984. DR. BUCK: Mr.

Speaker, is the minister in a position to indi cate to Albertans if all the certificates have been sent out to licence holders, indicating to them that they have to renew their plates? Because at this time, of the four vehicles I have, I've only received one. That's an example of the efficiency in the department. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Four vehicles? DR. REID: Mr. Speaker, it would appear that some other members are making the remark I was going to make.

I suggest that any person who has not yet received the documentation, whether due to mailing errors or loss of the documents, promptly get in touch with the central office either by mail through the motor vehicles branch or else through a private issuer. The time is approaching when it will be difficult to get the process complete prior to the expiry of the present plates. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, in the studies of his department, is the minister in a position to indicate what loss in revenue there was to the local licensing agents by our going to this centralized system that we have in place at this time? DR.

REID: Under the current system, Mr. Speaker, local licen sing agents are paid a 7 percent commission, and they get that commission on the handling of the documents. Although they are not issuing the plates themselves, they still get the 7 percent commission. So on that basis, there would be no loss of income to the private issuers. MR. PURDY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the Solicitor General. I understand that for the people that haven't got current plates, an extra tab will be sent out to go on last year's plate.

Is the minister prepared to hire more policemen to police this, because of the antiquated system that was put in place? DR. REID: Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing is the end of the antiquated system and the introduction of the new, comput erized system, which I trust will be much more efficient. MR. SPEAKER: Might this be the final supplementary on this topic.

March 22, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD DR. BUCK: Just a short supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. The minister indicated that the local licensing outlets were not losing any revenue. Can the minister indicate to the Assembly if this has been brought to his attention: when a person sends his application to the government, bypassing that local agent, what loss has there been to the local licensing agent? DR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is addressing the choice available to the person who is applying for plates. Whether they apply through the private issuer or return it by mail is a choice they make.

On the next issuing on the staggered system, it is my inten tion that every encouragement will be made in the documents for the person to take his documentation to the private issuer, and that as much as possible of it will be handled through the private issuing offices. Child Prostitution MR. PAPROSKl: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address my question to the hon. Attorney General. It deals with the sad, tragic, and revolting issue of child prostitution in this province. Is the Attorney General satisfied that any possible growth in child prostitution in this province is being guarded against? MR.

SPEAKER: Possibly that's a matter that could be explored in a debate, because what the hon. member is asking for is an opinion about the adequacy of something. MR. PAPROSKl: Mr. Speaker, due to the high incidence of child prostitution in this city, I understand, is the Attorney General investigating this area at all? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I have made suitable inquir ies into the issue raised by the hon. member. One can only readily concur in the expression that it's a matter of considerable concern and personal tragedy for those involved.

I wouldn't want to try to depreciate the level of concern that should be there, but the fact of the matter is that the police forces in both Calgary and Edmonton are indeed well aware of the level. One can see how that would come about. To a large extent, but not exclusively, child prostitution tends to occur in the same areas of the city as other types of prostitution. Young people, of course, stand out in those circumstances. The surveillance of all these strips or bawdy-house areas in both cities is very full and very adequate, and something that the police forces in both cities are determined to carry out. In

summary, Mr. Speaker, the answer to the hon. member's question is that quite a lot of information is available, and the actual incidence, in numbers, is not very great. MR. PAPROSKI: If possible, Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Attorney General if he has investigated or is willing to investigate the fact that a number of individuals are not being charged under the Criminal Code; that is, dealing with con tributing to juvenile delinquency of a minor under 14 by having sexual intercourse with that minor. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I don't have statistics for the last year or so.

I am not sure what that would show, in the sense of some potential increase in the incidence of child pros titution. The incidence of cases that have to be checked out tends to be relatively stable, and that might give an indication that the number of prosecutions which occur in a particular year would therefore represent the same as they would this year. The last year for which actual prosecution statistics were provided to me was 1980. In Edmonton there were 23 charges involving child prostitution.

Thirteen of those were contributing to juvenile delinquency, seven were for having sexual inter course with an underage female, and three on charges of weap ons, assault, or breach of a court order. Mr. Speaker, it is not up to me to interpret those figures to the Assembly, but I might make this observation.

Given the fact that the estimate of the police in both our major cities would be that known child prostitution cases at any given moment are probably not more than about 15 in each of the cities, the fact of a couple of charges of some sort in each month — most of them, contrib uting to juvenile delinquency — would show a fairly consid erable degree of enforcement. MR. PAPROSKI: It's my contention that that is 15 too many. A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder if the Attorney General could clarify once more for me if government plans any new initiatives to ensure that child prostitution is eliminated in this province. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, the nature of the question has already led me to check with the police forces in Calgary and Edmonton, with respect to their policing initiatives. It is a matter that indirectly involves the Attorney General, insofar as the Attorney General is involved in policing, and directly involves my office or the Crown attorneys with respect to the question of prosecutions, and I have briefly dealt with that.

As to the programs of the police, preventive and otherwise, they are really quite up to date and maintained. The reports I have received through the department from both police forces show very considerable attention to the problem and show that co-operation among various agencies involved in runaway sit uations, such as social services and schools, is an ongoing matter that the police treat with immediacy at the time any of those situations arise. MR. PAPROSKI: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary. It deals with the institutionalization of some juveniles who have been involved in prostitution.

I wonder if the Attorney General is investigating this area to see if this could indeed be corrected in some fashion, because it seems to be in error when one institutionalizes a child. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, that's a general observation which I suggest to the hon. member cannot really be true. Very often your child prostitute is a runaway who has left home for reasons that perhaps any person would leave home: battery, alcoholism, or the like.

When this youngster is located by the agencies, with or without the assistance of the police — but in the case of a child prostitute, the police are likely to be involved at some point — surely the best thing for the youngster is to be out of the home atmosphere for at least some time, although my understanding is that efforts are surely made to see the child returned to a home atmosphere, where that can be done. The institutionalized atmosphere is simply that of the child welfare authorities taking responsibility at a certain point in a critical case. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary North West.

I am watching the clock and hoping that we can deal with this briefly, whatever the question is.

104 ALBERTA HANSARD March 22, 1984 Sulphur Emissions Control MRS. EMBURY: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of the Environment. Yesterday in Ottawa, at an international conference on acid rain, Canada and nine other countries agreed to reduce sulphur emission by 30 percent by 1993, with a further reduction of 50 percent by 1994. If Alberta is going to partic ipate in the federal acid rain abatement program, how will Alberta implement a 50 percent reduction in sulphur emission? MR. SPEAKER: That's a hypothetical question. Perhaps the minister could deal with it briefly. MR. BRADLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to clarify this very important matter. In fact, I just returned yes terday from a meeting of international ministers in Ottawa, at which an agreement was reached to reduce sulphur emissions in the 10 countries by 30 percent by 1993. Canadian environ ment ministers had earlier had discussions with regard to reduc ing sulphur emissions in Canada. At a meeting on March 6, we agreed that we would reduce wet sulphate deposition to 20 kilograms per hectare in areas in Canada which were sensitive. Mr.

Speaker, I might note that in the five-year period of 1978 to 1982, the deposition of wet sulphates was from two to five times lower in Alberta than the sensitive areas of Ontario, Quebec, and Nova Scotia. In fact, the 1982 average for Alberta was eight kilograms per hectare. So we were well below the level to which Canada has agreed it wishes to reduce the wet sulphate deposition, which has serious effect on moderately sensitive lakes in eastern Canada.

At that meeting the Canadian environment ministers agreed to a 50 percent reduction, but this would take place in an area which we have defined as being the eastern bubble — that area east of the Saskatchewan-Manitoba border. This is the area in which the major problem exists. So there will not be reductions in Alberta with regard to this Canadian acid rain abatement program. All the Canadian environment ministers realize the seriousness of the effects of acid rain if control programs are not in place.

I might note that Alberta has had in place for the past 10 years a very excellent program, which has resulted in very low emissions compared with those experienced in our eastern provinces. MR. SPEAKER: I have to recognize the answer as being a ministerial announcement, regardless of the obvious importance of the topic. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to deal with some of the questions and motions on the Order Paper today. I request that some be held; others we shall deal with in other ways.

I would ask that all the questions — 132, 133, and 150 — stand and retain their places on the Order Paper, together with motions 135, 142, 146, 148, 149, and 151. [Motion carried] head: MOTIONS FOR RETURNS 134. Mr.

Notley moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing copies of (1) all correspondence between the Attorney General and any other person, and (2) all reports submitted for the consideration of the Attorney General bearing primarily on questions of policy and policy implemen tation which had as their culmination the issuance by the Deputy Attorney General on August 25, 1983, of the memorandum titled Investigations Affecting Alberta Government Depart ments and/or Alberta Government Employees. MR. CRAWFORD: Mr.

Speaker, in respect of Motion 134, correspondence between myself and other persons would be available basically with the consent of that other person. Sub section (2) of the proposed return, though, would normally be outside the purview of documents that would be produced in the Assembly, because it relates specifically to interior mem oranda within the department. For that reason, Mr.

Speaker, I wondered about the most suitable way of amending the motion and have decided that the best amendment would be one that was used a number of months ago in the Assembly for some motions that raised such matters; that is, that it be amended by adding at the end of it: subject to the general principles contained in

section 390 of the Fifth Edition of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms insofar as they may relate to a provincial leg islature and, in the case of correspondence, subject to concurrence of the author. I move that amendment to the motion, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: I'm not sure whether the hon. Leader of the Opposition has received a copy of that amendment. I haven't. However, it's just been read. If hon. members think they recall it sufficiently, I'll ask if there's any discussion. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Question. [Motion as amended carried] 141. Mr.

Notley moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing copies of any and all assessments, studies, reports, and other like documents prepared by or for the government or any of its agencies or departments, detailing problems encountered in the construction and maintenance of the earth-fill dam on the Paddle River. MR. BRADLEY: Mr. Speaker, I wish to move an amendment to this motion. I have copies here for you and the Leader of the Opposition.

With regard to this motion, similar to the motion introduced by my hon. colleague the Attorney General, I wish to amend the motion so it will conform with parlia mentary tradition. In addition, perhaps I should read the amend ments and give an explanation of them. I move that Motion for a Return No. 141 be amended:

(1) By striking out the words "studies, reports, and other like documents"' and substituting the words "studies and reports".

(2) By inserting after the word "dam" the words "since March 1981".

(3) By adding the following words at the end of the motion: "subject to the general principles contained in

section 390 of the Fifth Edition of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms insofar as they may relate to a provincial legislature and, in the case of correspondence, subject to the concurrence of the author. Mr. Speaker, the reason for these amendments is the normal parliamentary procedure not to table interdepartmental corre spondence. That's the reason in terms of reducing the substance to "studies and reports". With regard to "since March 1981", that's when the dam first started construction. So I think that's

March 22, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 105 the time frame from which we should be looking. And the third conforms with parliamentary tradition. [Motion as amended carried] 152. On behalf of Mr. R. Speaker, Dr. Buck moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing: The cost of Premier Peter Lougheed's February 1984 trip to Sarajevo, Yugoslavia, London, and Montreal, including expenses incurred for transportation, accommodation, enter tainment, and other expenditures paid by the government of Alberta. Identification of the person or persons who accompanied the hon.

Premier and the total of all expenditures, paid by the government of Alberta, incurred by each individual. MR. HORSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I have a very small amendment to that motion. Since the trip in question also included a visit to New York, I propose an amendment that just adds the city of New York to the list of places visited, so the whole matter might be complete in one return. [Motion as amended carried] 153. On behalf of Mr. R. Speaker, Dr. Buck moved that an order of the Assembly do issue for a return showing details of out- of-country trips on government of Alberta business by the hon.

Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs between Jan uary 1, 1983, and March 1, 1984, inclusive, indicating: (1) itinerary of each trip, including the expenditures incurred for transportation, accommodation, entertainment, and any other expenditures paid by the government of Alberta; (2) identification of person or persons who accompanied the hon. minister, and a list of expenditures incurred by each, paid by the government of Alberta; (3) a copy of written reports, if any, provided by the hon. minister, outlining the purpose and value of the above- listed out-of-country trips. MR. HORSMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I discussed this matter with the mover of the motion and advised him that all the information sought in this return is being made available as a result of all the other requests that had been previously accepted, either last fall or, in the case of this calendar year, in the return that was accepted on Tuesday of this week. I would therefore ask that the motion be defeated. DR. BUCK: If defeating will do it — or else can it be orally withdrawn on Mr. Speaker's behalf? MR. SPEAKER: Once it's moved it may be withdrawn by unanimous consent. DR. BUCK: On behalf of Mr.

Speaker, I move that Motion 153 be withdrawn. MR. SPEAKER: Is there unanimous consent? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. [Motion withdrawn] head: MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS 208. Moved by Mr. Martin:

Be it resolved that the Assembly urge the government to institute the following policy: That until such time as the government's budgetary revenues from all sources once again exceed its budgetary and statutory expenditures in all categories, all ministers of the Executive Council, all deputy ministers, all ministerial assistants, all Members of the Legislative Assembly, and all employees of the government and its departments, agencies, commissions, Crown corporations, authorities, boards, bureaus, committees, councils, and foundations be required, when travelling by air on a commercial carrier while on the public business and at public expense, to travel "economy class" or "tourist class", and not to travel "first class".

MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'm interested in getting on with this debate and hearing what some government members have to say, so I'm not going to take a great deal of time. Motion No. 208 is very straightforward. We have heard a lot about restraint from this government over the last year. We hear the word "restraint" bandied around all the time on almost every announcement the government makes. We hear them telling average Albertans that it's time we all tighten our belts. It seems to be a case, as the minister has piously preached to Albertans, of do as I say and not as I do.

There are many other cases of frivolous spending that we've talked about in this Legislature on both sides of the House. I'm not going to bore anybody by talking about Kananaskis or Peter's palace in Calgary or a Senate committee that's going to travel all over Canada and, I might add, possibly in other parts of the world. We could go on talking about frivolous spending. We on the opposition side have said many, many times that this is where we should begin to cut back on unnec essary government spending.

If the government would preach restraint and deal with this and come back with this, they certainly would get the support of the Official Opposition of this House. Mr. Speaker, at a time when we have this frivolous type of spending, we are telling Albertans, as I said, that they have to restrain themselves, tighten their belts. We're also at the time the U of A is talking about bringing in quotas — and we'll talk to the minister about this at some time — because they say they don't have enough money from the provincial government.

We have the social service cutbacks, and the Min ister of Social Services and Community Health is very proud. He says we saved $50 million there, at a time when unem ployment is at its highest, at a time when we have user fees, at a time when we announce zero percent grants for education to the local school boards. We are suggesting that they're saying very clearly to all these groups — and all these services affect average and below average income Albertans in this province — that this is necessary because of the tough recessionary times we're in. We hear this all the time.

At a time when we are in restraint, Mr. Speaker, we are saying that there seems to be double standards. There seems to be rules for the average Albertan and other rules, if you like, for Albertans at lower incomes. But life goes on for members of this government and the amount of money they're spending on what I consider frivolous at best. We are saying that if we're serious about restraint, let's send a message to Albertans. Let's tell them that at the government level we are also concerned about restraint, and we'd be willing to do it. Some hon. members may say this is not a lot of money. I would disagree.

A lot of trips go, let's say, from here to Ottawa return. A lot of expenses would involve going to the national capital. We find that a first-class return flight to Ottawa is $1,123. We find that an economy or business class, if you like — not the really cheap flight — an average business flight is $711. That's a saving of $412. There are a lot of flights on public business. The $412 will begin to add up to thousands and thousands of dollars.

106 ALBERTA HANSARD March 22, 1984 You might say we're being picky here with the government. We checked just two other governments and found out. In B.C. the message has been very similar. Mr. Speaker, I don't agree with the things that are being done in British Columbia, but at least I find a certain consistency there. We find that when they brought in their restraint measures in British Columbia, first- class air travel was prohibited as part of the government's restraint program. The Treasury Board order of August 3, 1982, stated that first-class travel was prohibited.

Prior to their restraint program, only cabinet ministers were travelling first class. Now, under this Treasury Board order of August 3, not even cabinet ministers are to travel first class in British Colum bia. So at least they're being consistent as a right-wing government with their restraint program. They are at least say ing that restraint is there for all of us, not just certain ones. Mr. Speaker, we also wanted to check, as we did, with the Manitoba government to see what they did. It's very interesting what the Manitoba government does. The practice is . . . [inter jection] That's true, under Mr.

Blakeney the Saskatchewan government all travelled economy too. In Manitoba the practice is that everyone travels economy. No one travels first class, including the Premier. There is min imal out-of-province and out-of-country air travel, and it must be approved centrally by the premier. Staff do not generally travel. The Premier generally flies by himself, and the staff remain in Manitoba. He doesn't need a whole entourage to follow him around; he's not the king of Manitoba. For example, he's flying alone to a meeting in the Yukon this week. He also travels alone to Ottawa. What I'm saying very clearly, Mr.

Speaker, is that other governments are doing this. They understand what I call the symbolism of what we're talking about here. It seems that this government likes to sort of speak down to people. We have cabinet on high, speaking down to the plebeians: you people restrain yourselves, but it's business as usual for us and our friends. That's just not good enough, because the symbolism of what we do in this Legislature is extremely important. If we believe in restraint and we're talking to other Albertans, they are looking at us to see what we're doing.

When they see that ministers can waste $412 going to Ottawa, they say: why are they picking on us? Before they start to cut into things like education, social services, and health care, why are they not cutting into these expenses? I recognize that just flying economy class is not going to solve all our problems. The point I'm trying to make here is that it's symbolism. If the government is really serious about cutting back on government expenses, then they take the sym bolism and do what the Manitoba and B.C. governments did. They cut back and say, everybody.

First of all, they cut back on travel, but they make sure that when it's necessary on public business everybody goes economy class. I think the old saying is especially appropriate here, and this is what Albertans are looking at: your actions speak louder than your words. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I look forward to government members who are concerned about government spending sup porting this motion. I've heard a lot of talk in this Legislature in the last year, but specifically in the last week, about the need to get a grip on government expenses.

We have a budget coming up, where I'm sure the rhetoric will still be that we have to tighten our belts and restrain ourselves. If government members are serious about this, I am sure they're all going to jump to their feet and support me on this. I know the hon. Member for Edmonton Belmont understands the symbolism of how impor tant this is in this day and age.

I'm not saying that there are not other things we could do, but if we passed this today and it became government policy it would send a very clear message out to Albertans that this government, while talking restraint, is serious and is willing to cut down on some of its perks and restrain itself. So with those few words, Mr. Speaker, I am very interested to hear from the government members on this. I may be naive, but I believe this is a motion they will agree with. I expect that we'll have no trouble passing this motion in the next hour. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. NELSON: Mr.

Speaker, I too would like to address the motion very briefly. Certainly one of the priorities of the government is to restrain expenditures and at the same time recognize the importance of travel throughout the province, the country, and internationally when it benefits all Albertans. We also feel that the motion that has been presented has not gone far enough. As such, I would like to offer an amendment to the House. I have copies here for members.

My amendment is: by striking out the following clause: ". . . until such time as the government's budgetary revenues from all sources once again exceed its budgetary and statutory expenditures in all cate gories . . ." and further, by striking out all words after, "to travel", and substituting therefor: ". . . by the most economical means subject to considerations of time, the need for privacy for brief ings, and the availability of space." MR. HORSMAN: Mr.

Speaker, if I may speak to the amend ment, I think it is important to take this opportunity to set the record straight with respect to what is in fact government policy with respect to the subject of air travel. I certainly concur in the first part of the amendment, which removes the words relative to the balancing of the budget, if you will, because we as a government believe the same policy should apply and that we should not be extravagant in our travel expenditures whether the budget is balanced or, in the case of the current fiscal year, is in a deficit situation.

In other words, economy, restraint, frugality on the part of the government should be the case at all times and in all fiscal years. That has been the policy of our government, and it will continue to be the policy of the government. I certainly urge members of the Assembly to accept that part of the motion on that clear under standing. What we're talking about with respect to the second part of the amendment is considerably important. We're talking about travel by flying at public expense and on public business, which is in the motion by the hon. Member for Edmonton Norwood.

The words of the amendment say "by the most economical means subject to", and there are three items. "Considerations of time" relates to the importance of time ministers of the government and their staff have to spend in carrying out their responsibilities. Having been one of the min isters who has travelled extensively on the part of our government in pursuit of my responsibilities both as Minister of Advanced Education and Manpower in the previous term and now as Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs, I can speak with some experience.

I can assure all members of the Assembly and the Member for Edmonton Norwood that the travel time spent on an aircraft is carried out in working, by extensive reading of briefing materials, in discussion with staff members — or one staff member, because the policy is to have only one staff member travel with the minister in first class. Perhaps there have been occasions in previous years when that was breached. It is certainly quite clearly being enforced

March 22, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 107 today and has been for the last few years I can recall — one staff member, perhaps a deputy minister, perhaps an executive assistant, or a person with particular responsibilities for the item in question. For example, travelling as I did recently to the first ministers' conference on aboriginal rights, I had my deputy minister with me to discuss the extensive briefing materials we had to con sider. That time spent in travel was extremely valuable and important for the people of Alberta and for the government in terms of preparation for that particular conference.

I cite that as one example. That comes to the second part of the amendment, "the need for privacy for briefings". The fact of the matter is that on domestic Canadian flights at any rate the only way it is possible to obtain privacy, where two people can be seated next to each other discussing matters of a confidential nature, is on first- class accommodation. It's just not possible to do seated three persons abreast and seated in close proximity to the people in front and the people behind. It's a fact of life.

Of course I think it has to be accepted that it is important to have those confi dential discussions, particularly during flights that last several hours and during the course of briefings and discussions of positions to be taken by the government of Alberta in the meetings to which ministers are travelling. It's absolutely essen tial to have that privacy, or find the time some other way and have the time spent during the course of the travel completely wasted in terms of an opportunity for appropriate briefing of the minister by senior staff.

Finally, the amendment makes reference to "the availability of space". I grant that members may think that's not a matter of consideration. But I want to cite one recent example in my own experience as a minister, which points out the importance of that qualification. On a recent flight from New York City to Toronto, through no fault of my own I missed my flight, which had been booked in economy because it was a short flight. That is also a policy, that on short flights — I was unaccompanied. I was by myself. However, I was on government business at public expense.

On that short flight I was booked on economy. [interjection] Through no fault of my own — if the hon. member will just listen to the example — I missed the flight. The next available flight to Toronto was completely booked in economy, and there was one seat left in first class. I upgraded my ticket to take that first-class seat so I could indeed be in Toronto on the Sunday evening immediately prior to the ministerial con ference relating to aboriginal rights. If I had been strictured by the policy [proposed] by the hon.

Member for Edmonton Nor wood, I would not have been able to upgrade to the first-class seat and thus able to meet my colleagues in Toronto for the purpose of discussing the conference which was to take place during the course of the next two days; I just cite that as one example of why the amendment includes the terms "and the availability of space". It is often true that for short flights, it is necessary to obtain bookings on aircraft on short notice.

I think short flights for Albertans would have to include trips to British Columbia or as far east as Manitoba, where one would normally fly in economy or business class. On short notice, it may be that the only seats available are those in first class, and I think that is another reason for supporting the amendment with respect to the availability of space. As I have indicated, I just want to point out another example or two of experiences I have had during the past short while, since the beginning of the year.

In late January, I made a trip to Germany to meet the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs for the province of Ontario. I flew on an overnight flight from Calgary to Frankfurt, and I flew first class accompanied by one assistant only. We spent the first four hours of the flight solidly in briefing and reviewing the material that was necessary for me to be properly and totally prepared for the meetings which I was to undertake on behalf of the people of Alberta and our government over the next five days.

While it is true that I had read much of the material before embarking on the flight, those four hours were invaluable to me in terms of preparing ade quately and properly for the balance of the week in which I was involved in meetings from breakfast until late in the eve ning every day I was there. However, in keeping with restraint measures and keeping in mind the importance of curtailing expenditures as much as possible, on my return flight across the Atlantic I came back on business class from London to New York. That made more sense, because I had concluded my meetings.

I had spent almost two weeks in the course of meetings, in Bonn with officials from the Federal Republic of Germany and later in Paris and London with our Agent General and officials of the government of the United Kingdom, during that very intensive period I was abroad on behalf of the people of Alberta. I think that type of appropriate travel arrangement was not extravagant and in fact was necessary so I could do the proper job on behalf of the people of Alberta.

Therefore the motion as originally presented would have constricted the ability, the time that a minister has available to review, to be properly briefed, and to work — and I underline and repeat the word "work"— during the course of air travel. That's exactly my attitude, and that is the approach of the government. I would just like to respond, if I could, to the underlying implication of the motion which is before the Assembly today, that there are large crowds of people travelling together in first class on behalf of the government of Alberta. That, I repeat, is not the policy of the government.

The policy is for a minister to be accompanied by only one official; on short flights to travel in economy as I have indicated, unless subject to the matters which are so effectively put forward in the amendment; and in the case of return visits perhaps, with the necessity for the type of privacy required for the trip to a meeting which one is attending, to consider and take the same approach that I used in returning from Europe and use the business class which, as the hon. Member for Edmonton Norwood quite correctly points out, is considerably less expensive than first class.

They call it different things on different airlines, but I think we are all aware that there are really three classes, and in fact on some international flights there are now four classes available for air travel. In outlining government policy in a reasonable and under standable way such as I have just done, I think hon. members of the Assembly can come to the conclusion to accept the amendment proposed by the hon. Member for Calgary McCall. I urge members to do so. [Two members rose] MR. SPEAKER: I believe the hon. Member for Drayton Valley caught my eye first. Perhaps it was looking the wrong direction. MRS.

CRIPPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I might say at the outset that I'm pleased to speak on the amendment. I've never flown first class, by the way. I might also add to Mr. Martin that he doesn't need to feel too badly when people look down on him. With our height, Ray, they always do. [interjection] That's right. I wanted to get in on the debate, Mr. Speaker, because on December 19 at a Members' Services meeting, this whole issue

108 ALBERTA HANSARD March 22, 1984 was discussed extensively. I'm just going back to the transcript of that meeting, where I indicated that consideration must be given to using excursion airfares where possible and compar ative pricing must be done. In answer to that question, Mr. Stefaniuk said: I can assure Mrs.

Cripps that that is done in all instances, not only [in] committees but wherever Legislative Assem bly funds [are used] travelling. [Perhaps] there is a seat sale, an excursion fare, or a charter available, those seats are taken advantage of, whether it's in committees, in general travel, or [in] Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. We do not, under any normal circumstances, go beyond the lowest available fare at the time. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to point out that this isn't a new initiative. This isn't an initiative that has been put forward by Mr. Martin or only the opposition.

It's an initiative which the government, as the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovern mental Affairs has just indicated — it's standard policy. Cer tainly it was well amplified in the discussion we had in Members' Services that day. In fact the discussion took place prior to my making a motion. Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the committee, said: "just for record purposes, it might be well to have a record of Mrs. Cripps' expression of principle", which we did later in the meeting. I'd like to read that motion into the record, Mr. Speaker.

The motion should read: that in travel by legislative com mittees, consideration [should] be given to the use of excursion airfares where possible — that is, where time and conditions permit — and that comparative prices [must] be obtained for that travel. That's the motion that was made in Members' Services on December 19, 1983. The chairman said: Could we inject the word "continue"in that motion, because that in fact is the present practice; otherwise it [would look] like an innovation.

We did that, so the motion then would read: "that . . . con sideration be given to the [continued] use of excursion airfares where possible". I believe it's very important that members of the Legislature become as knowledgeable as possible by firsthand discussions and visits to other areas. We're going to make decisions which affect all Albertans, and they must be made taking into con sideration Alberta's place within the Canadian, North Amer- ican and world environment and economy. The very best way to be able to assess these situations is to evaluate them per sonally.

It also gives the members of the Assembly an oppor tunity to familiarize others with Alberta's position, advantages, and opportunities. In selling Alberta, we have to be visible, knowledgeable, and friendly. I think the knowledgeable part probably goes back to the Minister of Federal and Intergov ernmental Affairs' comments on being briefed prior to reaching a destination. Nevertheless, it's very important that Members of the Legislative Assembly and, as the motion points out, all mem bers of government are prudent when travelling in the service of their government responsibilities.

For this reason I made the motion in Members' Services and support the similar motion which is before the Legislative Assembly today. MR. KOWALSKI: Tell everybody who voted in favour of it. They're all Conservatives. MRS. CRIPPS: We all voted in favour of it. MR. KOWALSKI: All the Conservatives. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, just very briefly this afternoon, I would like to enter into the debate and say I'd like to support the amendment. The amendment, the way I understand it, gives you the flexibility to do what you have to do when you think you have to do it.

I have been on many legislative committees, and I have been on many trips on behalf of the taxpayers of this province. I want to stand in my place and say that I believe the elected people respect the fact that they are spending the taxpayers' money. I have only flown first class once in my political career, and I think it was certainly justified. We were going on a fact finding committee to look at restorations in the maritimes, and I think that is reflected in the excellent job going on in the Ukrainian heritage village at Elk Island park. On the way down — the hon. minister Mrs.

LeMessurier, her executive assistant, and I did not have the opportunity before that time to discuss all the itinerary we were going to be looking at and the things we were going to do. In the rush of summer work and the things we were doing, we did not have that opportunity. There's just an instance, the only time that I've ever flown first class because we had business to do. On the way back, we flew economy. As a matter of fact, we saved the taxpayer consid erable dollars because of the wild driver, the hon. Minister of Culture. We used a car in many instances when we had airplane tickets booked.

So I have confidence in the members being judicious in the expenditure of taxpayers' money. I want to say to my learned friend, the hon. Member for Edmonton Norwood, that it always intrigues me how the social ists look after the taxpayers' dollars. I know that when the New Democratic government in British Columbia came to power under the hon. Mr. Barrett, the first thing they did was to decide: we have two legislative sessions, therefore we should double our wages. And hair on them, at least they had the backbone to do it. Here they don't have the backbone to do that, but that should be done. MR.

MARTIN: The Socreds voted for it. DR. BUCK: That's a bit of a tongue-in-cheek thing about the way other parties look after the taxpayer's dollar. But seriously, Mr. Speaker, I believe very, very strongly that we respect the fact that when we're on government busi ness, we are spending the taxpayers' money. As I say, in the many years that I've been in this Assembly, on legislative committees, on other duties, at Parliamentary Association func tions, I have not seen the taxpayers' money being squandered.

Once in a while you do get ripped off by some of the locals who think that if you come from Alberta you've got buckets full of money. So they add a little on to the tip, because they think you're from Alberta and you're filthy rich. But that is something we don't have any control of. Mr. Speaker, I think the amendment really does give flex ibility. When you need privacy, when you have briefing to be done, you can do it. But I have confidence that the elected people do not fly first class just because they're spending some body else's money.

I have enough confidence that they will be judicious in the spending of that money, so I am pleased to support the amendment. MR. SZWENDER: Mr. Speaker, just to add a few words with out repeating the comments already made by other hon. mem bers. I was also extremely pleased to see my colleague from Clover Bar adding his support to the amendment. Mr. Speaker, some of the arguments made referred to sym bolism. Possibly that is one of the issues here, in the sense that average Albertans think of someone getting in an airplane as

March 22, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 109 putting on his sunglasses and his Hawaii shirt and flying off to have a lot of fun. If we're talking about that kind of sym bolism, it's misleading. For members of this government, to fly only defines one commitment and that's work. Certainly if they realized that the flights entailed just work and being away from your family and putting in countless hours, they wouldn't look at it in the symbolism of flying somewhere. They would look at it in the context of people elected to do a job in this Assembly doing it in the best way possible.

The subamendment gives us the flexibility to provide for all members of this Assem bly and other government officials to do that job adequately. Mr. Speaker, just briefly I'd like to add a little story as to why I feel the amendment should be considered. In 1980 I was with a group of students in Ottawa, and we were returning home. I guess anyone who has flown with a group of students would realize what kind of nightmare that would be, especially when there were about 90 of them on the airplane. Who joined us on the airplane but John Diefenbaker. Mr.

Diefenbaker was in the twilight of his career, only a few months before his death, but it was quite a thrill to everyone to meet him. As it turned out, he couldn't get his first-class seat or he was bumped; I can't remember what it was. He ended up sitting on that airplane amidst 90-odd students, who for the whole two and a half hour flight from Ottawa — there was a stopover in Regina, I think — badgered him for autographs, talked to him about various issues, and must have taken 300 or 400 pictures with flashbulbs going off in his eyes. Although it was probably quite an education for everyone to meet him, if Mr.

Diefenbaker had wanted to rest or do some work, it was virtually impossible. If we could transpose that situation to other members of this government, we could see how difficult it would be in many circumstances. With those brief words, I urge that all members support this amendment. MR. R. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to make one or two comments with regard to this subject. I'll keep them very nar row so other members have a chance to enter into the debate.

One of the concerns I have had for a number of years with regard to ministers travelling all over the world, particularly outside Canada, off the continent or into the United States . . . I have never really been concerned with regard to first-class travel; there are circumstances where that's necessary. There are times when work must be done en route, and I don't argue with that. The thing that concerns me, though, is the return of the various ministers to this Legislature. I know that happened during my time in government.

I must say that as a minister, I was only on one trip out of Canada, and that was to the Scandinavian countries. Upon my return I tabled in the Leg islature, as well as filed in the department, a 90-page report on the findings of that trip in terms of what we went to see, what we found out, and some recommendations that could be used within the department. I've sat in this Legislature for some 20 years, and I know my colleagues at that time — I see the ministers in this government flouting that rule even worse.

There is not any kind of report placed before the Legislature, not in ministerial state ments, not during throne debate, not during budget debate, nor is a statement made on any other occasion in this Legislature which says: I have toured the country of Germany for this purpose, found these things, and am recommending this to this Legislature. I do not recall in this Legislature — outside of the speech of the hon. Horst Schmid, when I requested by note, and I believe also verbally and privately that he make a state ment in the House so I better understood what he was doing travelling to many countries.

But I must say that with other ministers — and I stand to be corrected — that procedure has not, even verbally, been followed in this Assembly. To me that is a neglect of responsibility. When a fund such as the Minister of Federal and Intergov ernmental Affairs spent in the last fiscal year — as I recall looking at the report, I believe it was over $200,000 in travelling expenses, without any type of verbal report and certainly no written report back to this Assembly or tabled in this Assembly. I think that's neglect and certainly not being responsible to the taxpayers of this province.

I think it should be a requirement of every minister or MLA after travelling to follow up with a report to the Legislature. In terms of the Senate, our select committee will report back to this Legislature. In terms of Public Accounts or the workers' compensation committees, a report will come back to the Legislature. So the travelling is understood through those reports. But there are other informal arrangements that occur, such as the one my colleague was on with the hon. Minister of Culture, that should be reported to this Assembly in terms of its findings. Mr.

Speaker, I think it is neglectful of us as legislators when we don't do that, and to me it hinges on a bit of irresponsibility. I wanted to make that point in this debate. I've felt this for some time, and I think that's an easy correction for the Premier and the ministers to make at this time. If they do that, and if it's necessary to travel first-class on an airplane to come back to Alberta, to prepare that report, whether it's one page or a hundred pages, then I'm fully behind the spending for first- class travel. MR. HORSMAN: I wonder if the hon. member would entertain a question. MR. R.

SPEAKER: Most certainly, Mr. Speaker. MR. HORSMAN: In view of the remarks he just made, I wonder if the hon. member would be satisfied if in the particular case of my trip to Germany, I report to the select committee, which was my firm intention. I've already made arrangements with the chairman to report directly to the committee on the results of my visit to Germany relative to the Upper House in that particular state.

Would that be an appropriate way of responding to the concerns he has just raised — as I already did with respect to my trip last August to the select committee at a meeting at which the hon. member was not present? I wonder if that approach would be satisfactory. In that particular case, it relates to a select committee. Is that a satisfactory way of dealing with the concern? MR. R. SPEAKER: In answer to the question: yes, that is one of the routes that would be satisfactory. I would also like to add to that, Mr. Speaker.

A presentation to the Legislature is important as well, so the document could be filed in the Legislative Library. Example: a number of individuals in this Legislature and in the previous Legislature travelled to Israel to look at irrigation systems. I questioned some of the reasons some of the persons went on that journey.

I think if the first or second person who had observed it, the Premier for example, would have filed a statement with regard to that with some supportive information, the MLAs of this Legislature could have been brought up to date and maybe not had as good an experience — it's nice to go to the country — but an adequate experience for the needs of this Legislature. And we could have cut back on some of the costs. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to speak to the amend ment, certainly the first part of it — by striking out the fol

110 ALBERTA HANSARD March 22, 1984 lowing: ". . . until such time as the government's budgetary revenues . . ." and so forth. No problem with that at all; it makes eminent good sense. I think the last part of it, "by the most economical means subject", still doesn't allay the total problem in my mind. I think perhaps there is a tendency for all of us, cabinet ministers, deputy ministers, MLAs, et cetera, to think that we need more than we need at particular times — the need for privacy, considerations of time, briefing, and avail ability of space. As I mentioned, other governments — the hon.

Member for Clover Bar's colleagues in B.C., where he found out about the 3 percent sales tax. Part of their restraint program is that it has to be first-class travel, and I had mentioned about the NDP government. In answer to the minister's statement about briefings, I still suggest that briefings probably should not be done on a plane anyhow. I don't expect that most of them are. I really do not see that much difference between first class and tourist class, because often from what I've seen, the only thing they can do in first class is tip a few more drinks.

But I'm not suggesting for a minute that the minister does that. The point I make is that in Manitoba and B.C., two pro vincial governments are able to get away from first-class travel altogether in the midst of a recession. But in saying that, being the positive person I am, I'm half in shock because the amend ment is a step in the right direction. It certainly lays out better the procedure people should look at. As a result, Mr. Speaker, at this point I will support the amendment as being perhaps a reasonable compromise.

It's the closest thing I'll ever get to a compromise in this House, so I think I'll jump at the chance. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Question. MR. SPEAKER: Are we on the amendment? Does the hon. member wish to speak to the amendment? MR. NELSON: Just close debate, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: No, the mover of an amendment doesn't get an opportunity to close; it's contrary to our Standing Orders. If there are no other members to speak, I'll put the question on the amendment. [Motion as amended carried] MR. SPEAKER: The allotted time for this order is about to expire in two minutes.

With unanimous consent of the House, we could deem it to have expired and go on to the next item. HON MEMBERS: Agreed. head: PUBLIC BILLS AND ORDERS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT BILLS AND ORDERS (Second Reading) Bill 201

An Act to Amend the Hospitals Act MR. WOO: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring Bill 201 to the floor for debate. As most members will recall, many of us had an opportunity to speak to the issue of palliative care by way of resolution during the course of the last session. In this instance I would like to initially direct my comments to the Bill itself and then make a number of observations, recognizing that a number of members would wish to speak to it and perhaps in some specific areas can describe certain situations much better than I can.

The purpose of Bill 201 is to provide the legislative accom modation necessary to hospitals to establish palliative care both as a unit of medical care within the hospital environment and, very importantly, to foster palliative care service as a com munity-based program to serve a very special need of Albertans. The Bill will basically allow a hospital, at the direction of its board and the hospital district, to formally request and ini tiate a palliative care program. The Bill allows the minister a certain amount of discretionary power to approve such a request.

Upon such approval, the program can be implemented by that hospital, concurrent with the required fiscal resources within the hospital's provincial funding through the Department of Hospitals and Medical Care. Mr. Speaker, I believe present legislation allows a number of program initiatives but, with respect to palliative care, it is not generally specific. Bill 201 formally addresses the question of palliative care in a more singular manner.

By being specific, the Bill will provide hospitals with the ability to initiate such programs through the exercise of local autonomy and, in doing so, will allow each hospital board and hospital district to deter mine its own needs based upon public support and public demand. This reflects my belief that many share my view that not every hospital wants or needs a palliative care program. For example, if we look at the city of Edmonton and its regions, it may well be that a regional concept in the provision of palliative care service would be not only highly desirable but certainly much more cost effective.

For example, the focal points of such a program could well be that the present Youville unit of the General hospital could serve as a teaching and training centre for both medical professionals and community- based laypersons who play very important support roles, and as an added emphasis, specialized research in geriatrics; the W. W. Cross Cancer hospital with specialized research and training in cancer-related cases; and the U of A and Royal Alex in highly specialized roles in clinical practice and other research with respect to palliative care. In connection with the W. W. Cross Cancer hospital, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to make a number of additional com ments. In its present form, the Bill appears to preclude the Cross hospital from consideration. I think it is important that a clear distinction be made in terms of recognition of a facility that has not only a long history but a distinctive, distinguished, and highly specialized area of practice and treatment.

There is a need to not only sustain the research efforts practised by this hospital but it should be enhanced to the extent that the palliative concept is very much an integral part of its program and, as such, its consulting role in the care and community-based pal liative service should be expanded. In the case of the Cross hospital, the terms of Bill 201 would not be applied with respect to the

section that makes reference to "an approved hospital with a rated capacity in excess of 100 beds". In what I have said so far, Mr. Speaker, we clearly indicate the need for a mechanism to co-ordinate the various functions of these elements. This need would be supported through the regional concept, particularly when the areas of auxiliary and nursing hospitals and nursing homes are tied into it. One con sideration could be the utilization of a selected board or a selected hospital district to provide that type of co-ordinating function.

I think it is important that the perception of a palliative care unit is one of seeing the unit and its service program as an integral part of the hospital system. There is always the danger of such a unit being seen as a place to relegate the terminally

March 22, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 111 ill on an institutional basis. The palliative care unit and service are in fact designed to provide physical, social, moral, psy chological, and spiritual support to both the patients and their families.

In its broadest and most desirable sense, I think the very important element of the community-based program, with the involvement of support groups — existing home care pro grams, members of the pastoral association, laypeople, and so on — which provide an nonclinical team approach, can be provided to support the outreach program stemming from a hospital-based palliative care unit. When all of this is taken into consideration, Mr.

Speaker, I think it is important that we recognize the need for direction and leadership to be undertaken by a team of medical practi tioners and, perhaps in individual cases, by the family physician or another medical practitioner who has experience with respect to palliative care service. Mr. Speaker, we are fortunate in this province to have the expertise of people in the medical and nursing professions who not only have practical experience in the palliative care concept but who care enough to work diligently to see that such a program to serve Albertans becomes a reality.

In this regard I regret that my colleague the hon. Member for Lethbridge West is unable to be in the House this afternoon to speak on behalf of one of his constituents, Mrs. Irma Dogterom, and her Leth- bridge-based support group, who have had a long and contin uing interest in the matter of palliative care. Another comment I would make, Mr. Speaker, is that some where along the way I hope the minister of hospitals might give consideration to the establishment of a palliative care foun dation.

This would allow hospitals with palliative care units the ability to raise and receive funding, in addition to government funding, through individual bequests and donations from both the private and corporate sectors. This sort of ini tiative will allow Albertans to further demonstrate their support. Mr. Speaker, palliative care holds different

interpretations for different people. The term "hospice care" has been used interchangeably with the term "palliative care". Technically there may be a difference, but philosophically I think everyone is talking about the same thing. It would be useful if we could define palliative care. I don't know who the author is, but the definition that I think best describes palliative care is this. It is a simple statement, but I find it very appropriate.

Palliative care is defined as a service offered to patients for whom care and the prolongation of life are no longer valid treatment goals but for whom therapy aimed at improving the quality of the remaining life is appropriate for both patients and their families. Mr. Speaker, the care of the dying is a subject that has created a great deal of public interest and attention. It is a matter that today's society has recognized as being a sincere service based upon need. The public has come to recognize it as being both valid and genuine.

Over the course of the last 15 years or so, the growing interest and concern surrounding the care of the dying has resulted in a great deal of research, documentation, and debate directed toward the hospice concept and the current concept of palliative care. A number of world wide symposiums and conferences have been held in a number of countries over the course of the last few years, some of which have been attended by medical practitioners from this province and this city. One was attended by my colleague from St.

Albert, who also serves as chairperson of the Hospitals and Medical Care Policy Advisory Committee to the Minister of Hospitals and Medical Care. Much of that research and documentation, Mr. Speaker, was reflected in the very meaningful debate that took place in this Assembly last year. The occasion was based upon the resolution I brought to the floor of this House which urged the government to establish a palliative care program as an integral part of the hospital program. In that respect I am indeed grateful not only for the support of hon. members who spoke but for the general support of Albertans as a whole.

In terms of Bill 201, and in order to allow time for other members to speak to the Bill, I would again ask for that support. Thank you. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I rise briefly to comment on Bill 201. First of all, the Official Opposition intends to support the Bill. As the hon. member has mentioned, there are varying

definitions of palliative care but, as he said, I think the phi losophy is rather straightforward. To me, the main objective of palliative care is simply to improve the quality of the remain ing life of the dying person. By relieving distress in the ter minally ill patient, such care helps them prepare to die with dignity, it addresses the physical, psychosocial, and spiritual needs of dying patients and, very significantly I think, their families. Of course palliative care is a relatively new concept.

Some other jurisdictions are further ahead than us, but I think it's important that this Bill be discussed and, if possible, passed now. Mr. Speaker, there are four major reasons I think it is important to look at this concept now. First of all, it is generally accepted that some 70 percent of deaths do not now occur at home but in institutions. Of course this changes the whole concept of dying from what it used to be and brings in many different factors that play on the indi vidual and the family.

The second reason is that the special needs of the dying and their families are not generally addressed by active treatment hospitals. Of course we talked about You- ville; that's different. But generally it is not addressed at all by active treatment hospitals. Another important factor that we've alluded to in this House before is that we have a population where the proportion of the aged is increasing. So clearly, Mr. Speaker, this is a problem that is going to get more difficult as we go on. Our population is aging.

The fourth reason I think we should deal with this now is simply this: in this time of increasing hospital costs, these can be shown to be reduced. We know that costs can be reduced — we hear it from the Minister of Hospitals and Med ical Care — by a focus on supportive rather than high tech care. I think the idea of support of family and professionals around them is an important aspect of palliative care. When I look at this Bill, Mr. Speaker, many people may say: in this time of restraint, we cannot afford it.

But I think what the Bill is saying very clearly is that: the Minister shall take the resolutions under consideration and if he is of the opinion that a palliative care unit should be established, he may include it in the hospital pro gram . . . Clearly the minister still controls the purse strings and, through the minister, the Legislature. So we're not going to go around and immediately build a palliative care unit at every 100 beds. What I see as the importance of this Bill is just emphasizing the importance of looking at this whole area.

It would empha size to hospital boards right across the province that this is something they should be looking at. I think the key thing, though, is that the minister still has, if you like, control of the purse strings. For this reason, Mr. Speaker, I think it is a Bill well worth supporting. As I said, it is a problem that is sig nificant now. As we face an ever-increasing aging population. I think it is more of a serious social problem than we sometimes recognize. So for those reasons, Mr. Speaker, I commend the Bill to hon. members of the Assembly.

112 ALBERTA HANSARD March 22, 1984 MRS. EMBURY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to support Bill 201 and commend the Member for Edmonton Sherwood Park for introducing this concept again, only in terms of a Bill. With the modifications and the specific ideas that are expressed in this amendment to the Hospitals Act, hopefully we can ask the Assembly in general to support this Bill. The Member for Edmonton Sherwood Park referred to the debate that took place last year when he introduced a motion on palliative care.

Upon reviewing that whole debate, there is a lot of excellent information that many of the members of the Assembly contributed toward the debate. In those speeches we sec a great deal of detail regarding the definition of palliative care, some of the different types of palliative care, and the importance of it. It was timely to have the debate at that time. The Member for Edmonton Sherwood Park referred to himself, and I'm sure there are other members like me who have had a lot of input from various people around the province supporting this concept.

I've had some detailed correspondence from two nurses in Edmonton who were very pleased to see the support that was given to this concept. I don't think anybody at all will argue against the concept of palliative care. I suppose the biggest concern at this time is where the dollars would come from to support a total program like this right across the province. We're certainly aware that there are different types of programs. Some would require a great deal of capital cost; others would have more money in an operating way.

So we know that each area, region or, in the large cities, different parts of the city would adapt a program that would meet the independent needs of the citizens. One thing I do support in this Bill is that there is local autonomy, which I think is very important, because one has to assume that some of the needs across the province would vary depend ing upon which model they use as a base for their palliative care program. There's a lot of concern in the community, particularly over the last few years, with our home care program.

More money has to be spent on this type of program so that if people still choose to die at home, they will be as comfortable as possible and receive all the support systems they need, not only for the physical well-being of the patient but also for mental and spir itual needs and the needs of the family. As I mentioned, this Bill would allow the flexibility of a variety of programs in a variety of settings. I think it is important at this time that they haven't been spelled out in the Bill.

Also in support of this Bill, it should be noted at this time that there have been many hospitals around Alberta that have requested funds for a palliative care unit. I notice that the Bethany Care Centre and the Calgary General hospital are two hospitals in Calgary that have made this request. In my speech on this subject last year, I dealt at great length with the Hospice Calgary program, which is conducted from the Tom Baker Cancer Centre in Calgary. Some of you in the Assembly may be aware of this program.

Of course some of the people who are directly involved in this live in my con stituency, so I feel very proud of the work they are doing in this type of program in both the medical and nursing staff. However, while it obviously serves specific needs in the city of Calgary, there is still room for other types of programs to be developed. If this Bill were passed, I suspect there would be an oppor tunity for volunteers to be used, if that was the choice at the local level. As you know, one of the outstanding concepts of sonic of the programs is to use volunteers as well as expert and well-trained staff.

I was very pleased to hear the Member for Edmonton Sher wood Park mention the idea of a possible foundation. In fact maybe we as members can anticipate that that might be his next private member's public Bill introduced to the Assembly on this issue. There's no doubt that we have to consider the restraint program we are in at this time. We have to look at the priorities of the government, not only in the Department of Hospitals and Medical Care but throughout the different departments. But I think that is an excellent opportunity to develop a foundation where private donations could be made.

That is exactly how the Hospice Calgary program was started; it was due to a private donation. I know that a lot of families of people who pass away from cancer feel very strongly about the need for more research and treatment for people who suffer from cancer. So I think we would find that there would be a lot of donations regarding this subject. The Member for Edmonton Norwood started his speech with a rather simplistic definition of palliative care, but he did go on to expand on all the different parts of care required, not only for the patient but also for the family.

While it's easy to reduce the definition to a rather simplistic one, I think there are a lot of aspects we covered in the debate last year that hopefully will be brought out again — what total care for that patient and family really means, and the wide variety of resources required. I feel I must take very strong exception to one of his state ments. If I heard the Member for Edmonton Norwood correctly, he took exception to the care the dying patient receives in our acute care facilities.

While he may have some examples to justify that statement, I've certainly always found that the med ical staff and, of course, the nursing staff — members of my own profession — have had a lot of knowledge and training in this particular area. I think most nurses caring for somebody who is dying, particularly in an acute care setting, are just as conscious of meeting the needs of the patient and the family as other people in a palliative care statement would be.

I want to put on record that when he was trying to justify the cost of this program in relationship to saving other dollars, I felt his statement was not justified from that point of view. Again, I'd like to commend the Member for Edmonton Sherwood Park for bringing forth this Bill, and I would certainly like to urge all members of the Assembly to support this Bill. DR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, it's my privilege this afternoon to rise to speak with respect to Bill 201.

I use the word "pri- vilege" with a very special emphasis because, in terms of the focus of the Bill, I think it pulls each member of the Assembly back to focus on a very important word. It's a four-letter word: life. With respect to the Bill and with respect to a plane accident in Calgary this mornng, it's come back with a certain emphasis and impact to members of this Legislature that it's one thing to come here — it's tough enough to get elected to be here, and it's very difficult in terms of the pressures upon all members in order to survive politically.

But there's another kind of pres sure there, that life is speeding by us. There are very few times when we really get a chance to slow down and contemplate what life means and what death means. I think that two mem bers of this Assembly came precious close to death today. Again, we have that difficulty; it's too easy to take life for granted. We are then like most people within society; we do our best to stay away from hospitals. We're not that interested in going there unless we really have to.

Then again, when we find that a friend of ours is terminally ill and hospitalized, oftentimes it's too easy to find a lot of other reasons why we just can't get there today. In terms of an analysis of that, whether you happen to be in the health care field, a clergyman, a social worker, whatever, oftentimes you have to sort of gear yourself

March 22, 1984 ALBERTA HANSARD 113 up once more to go there because of the intensity of the experi ence of parting with life and the prospect of death. Our well-respected colleague the Member for Calgary North West, who spoke prior to me, has great experience in nursing. Those of us in the Assembly who are privileged to know her know that she is a sensitive and caring individual. When she says that most people in the health care profession who are involved with dying patients have great sensitivity, nevertheless we have to realize that it's a tremendous drain upon those persons.

If ever a situation is one for burnout — burnout phys ically, burnout psychologically, burnout spiritually — it's for those persons who are involved on a day-to-day basis, day after day after day, with patients who are terminally ill. Of course that also applies to the families of such patients. The challenge is really there to go and be, to have a presence, to be with the person.

In the debate in this Assembly in 1983 with respect to Motion 213, put forward by the Member for Edmonton Sherwood Park, it was pointed out that probably the best thing you can do when you are in such a situation, meeting and being with a person who is terminally ill, is simply that — to be there. Secondly, it's better not to open your fat face unless you have something to say. Don't just say, gee, you're really look ing good today, if that's not true.

And don't say, oh boy, you can really lick this, when you've just had a conversation in the hallway with a physician saying, I don't think he's going to last the day. Far better that you just go and be in that room and reach out and touch, just touch. Gently hold the hand, gently touch the arm, if there are too many other pieces of sophisticated equipment in the way. That is really the essence of presence in terms of being with your friend, your colleague, whatever the relationship, the essence of being with the ter minally ill.

Fairly recently, as a matter of fact within the last month, a dear friend of mine died of cancer after a seven-month bout. He had just reached the grand old age of 50. Here was a person who didn't smoke, didn't drink. Last summer he developed a dry cough and finally got around to going to the doctor to find out what it was. Within four days he was admitted to hospital, and a large portion of one of his lungs was removed. At the same time, they discovered that the cancer had moved lower in his body.

Within a matter of a number of weeks, they were doing radiation not only to his abdominal cavity but also to his skull, because it had gone through him like wildfire. About five weeks ago, when I finally got back from a trip and went to that hospital — it was the Rockyview in Calgary — the first thing I did when I met with his wife and family was the only thing that I could do because of the impact of what was happening and the rapid progress of the disease. It was simply this: to put my arms around them and then listen to them.

Oftentimes in hurtful situations like that no one really wants to listen to you for very long, because you can't take the trauma of having to share someone else's trauma. But that's what's necessary: to listen, to touch. It was from there that I then went into the room with my friend and could see that he wasn't going to last more than a few days. I realize that all members of the Assembly know that my doctorate is not as a physician, not as a medical doctor. But with enough experience, you realize just how close the end can be. In that case I followed my own advice.

I didn't say any of those things that can come to your lips as a defence mechanism to save and shield your own hurt, rather I reached out and touched, and I held him. In the privacy of being alone with him, he realized that he didn't have much time. We talked about a few things and, as is often the case when we try to deal with the hurt that's happening, we have to deal with it for ourselves first and then try to deal with it for that person.

I said to him: Henri, I'm sorry I've been too busy being an MLA and I've been too busy being in Edmonton and other exotic places that I haven't been back here to be with you. Out of the bit of strength he had left, he looked at me in his puckish French manner, smiled, squeezed my hand, and said, teach you a lesson. That's the lesson I want to share with you in the debate this afternoon.

In this Assembly we're as guilty as anyone I know of being too busy to take time for just the few extra minutes to get back to some of our friends, in addition to trying to get back to the 65 phone calls that may have piled up in the last few days. What has all this to do with the Bill before us? It has lots to do with it. There's a crying need to have a higher public awareness with respect to palliative care. There are plenty of times when you can't be there, when I can't be there.

In the case of my friend, which I've just cited, his wife shared with me that she had tried to talk to the doctor and the nursing staff and say: look, he's dying; let's talk to him about it; let's let him know. She came up against a real brick wall in terms of hospital staff saying: no, no, we can't do that; we're still going to keep fighting; we're going to keep him together. Finally the wife had to say: I've heard something about pal liative care, and I know there's a doctor somewhere in Calgary; I want to talk to him, and I want to him to come to talk to my husband.

Because she dug in her heels, it finally happened and, in large measure, my friend was allowed to die with more dignity and more peace. The parameters of the Bill are interesting. It has the impact of saying that we're going to look at more of an institutional approach. An approved hospital with a capacity in excess of 100 beds, have a hospital board pass a resolution — that would be good; there would be another forum, another raising of sensitivity to the issue. Have the district board pass a resolution — again, a raising of sensitivity to the issues — then pass it on to the minister.

Hopefully the minister can make represen tations in terms of the budgetary process in his department, as well as with his colleagues here in the Assembly, to be able to get the proper funding in place for that. All of this would be a good thing, a good approach. But as the sponsor of the Bill realizes full well, palliative care is really a portable con cept. One doesn't necessarily have to have a facility, a hospice, laudable as that may be. Much more, one needs to have an attitude, an awareness, a sensitivity. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to share with the Assembly that in the last half hour I was privileged to be in conversation with a medical doctor who works with a very large Alberta corpo ration. We were talking about this particular Bill, and he went on to say that they have instituted a program within that com pany whereby they are indeed, through their services, working with persons who are dying. As a matter of fact, there are two company employees who are slowly dying at this time.

I would like to commend that individual, who is in the gallery, and the company for having that sensitivity to the needs of their employ ees. And so it is, Mr. Speaker. I know that I have perhaps been guilty of being too personal in terms of my comments this afternoon. Nevertheless I offer those comments to members of the Assembly not only in terms of their own life, also in terms of what may happen when they are privileged — I come back to that word — to have time to be with their friends or their family as those family members or friends are dying.

Too often, as my colleague from Edmonton Gold Bar knows all too well, your close friends, your family die suddenly, as a friend of his did just last week. There was no time for this creative oppor tunity to be able to share, to touch, to hold his friend.

114 ALBERTA HANSARD March 22, 1984 In the last year and a half, I know of two friends quite close to me, two ladies, whose husbands died of cancer. They had slow, difficult, lingering deaths. Those two ladies did a very courageous thing. They took their husbands home to die in the security of being amongst their family. It was very difficult, very traumatic, but it was very, very important for the persons who died, in terms of the dying process. Mr. Speaker, I thank members of the Assembly for listening so attentively this afternoon.

Once again I commend the sponsor of the Bill and urge all members of the Assembly to act upon the Bill. MRS. FYFE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to participate in the debate this afternoon, my first contribution to a debate in this session of the Legislature; I think it's appropriate to speak about a Bill supporting the concept of palliative care, which was introduced last year and was brought forward again this year by the Member for Edmonton Sherwood Park. I spoke at length last year on this subject. Last night I reviewed the comments I made, and I do not have any intention of repeating the words I said last time.

I would like to take just a few minutes to add a few new thoughts that I have acquired since last year's debate. Firstly, I congratulate the member for bringing forward this important topic. I know he feels very strongly about it. I'm sure all members of the Assembly realize that it's an important area we as government are becoming increasingly aware of, and know that we have been working on policy and in the near future will have to deal with a policy for palliative care pro grams within the province of Alberta.

I dare say that there are no two palliative care programs anywhere in the world that are alike, even though a wide variety of cities and hospitals have established palliative care programs. They vary, depending on whether they are hospital based, com munity based, or volunteer based, and all combinations of those factors. Last October I attended a palliative care conference spon sored by the Alberta Hospital Association, which was held at the Four Seasons Hotel in Edmonton.

This conference had a variety of resource persons, primarily from across Canada, that came to participate in a number of issues that were debated and discussed. There were the general issues of palliative care — what was happening across Canada, what was happening within Alberta — into specifics such as the grief and bereave ment process, pain and symptom control, planning finance, the dying child and the parent, the spiritual dimensions, volunteers, and a number of other general issues related to palliative care.

I found that the conference was very useful in expanding my knowledge in one particular area that I had been a bit troubled about. That relates to the planning and financing of a palliative care program. I had previously been advised, or it was my understanding, that a palliative care program could be equal in cost to that of intensive care and therefore the cost of it was a major and significant factor. That may be true, but I would like to share a little bit of information with the Assembly this afternoon that may help us better understand that financial impact.

In establishing a palliative care program in any specific area — at this point, I would like to diverge from the policy in Alberta that we have been talking about to a more specific program in one location. Assuming that a policy is in place in our province in which

Document details

Collection	Alberta — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	19840322
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	L20 S2 19840322 1430 01 han.pdf
Language	en
Format	json
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7b073fadb26ce3c008188511ac7133b1219b836c

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