LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA Title: Wednesday, April 12, 1972 2:30 p.m. (The House met at 2:30 pm.) PRAYERS (Mr. Speaker in the Chair.) head: head: POINT OF PRIVILEGE MR. STROM: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of privilege. Yesterday during the evening sitting of the Legislature, an hon. member of this House, in answer to a question asked during the review of the estimates, gave an answer directly opposite to the answer given to a similar question when it was asked a few days earlier. I refer, of course, to the answers given by the Deputy Premier and hon. Minister of Agriculture.

On Monday, April 10th I read from Hansard tape no. 15 during review of Appropriation No. 1102, Department of Agriculture, a question placed by the hon. Member for Wainwright, Mr. Ruste. "Are there any task force payments involved in this department as such?..." The answer by the hon. Minister of Agriculture and Deputy Premier: "No, there is no task force money in this vote..." Then yesterday, April 11th, I read from Hansard a question by the hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Leduc, Mr. Henderson, found on tape no. 27.

"How much is in the estimates and where is the money for the agricultural caucus committee, for example, otherwise known as task force, and is there any money in any of the appropriations that will be used indirectly to pay the travelling expenses of some of the messenger boys from the back bench that he chooses to send around the country?" The answer, after some reluctance on the part of the Deputy Premier, can be found in two parts, on tape no. 27. The hon.

Minister of Agriculture, or the Deputy Premier: "The amount would be relatively small, in the neighbourhood of something like under $10,000 in total." On tape no. 30, the hon. Minister of Agriculture or the Deputy Premier: "...the funds are in the Fees and Commission under General Ad ministration." And later, on the same tape, the hon. Minister of Agriculture, the Deputy Premier: "...Yes, No. 1102, under the heading of Grants." Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1561

27-2 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 This, Mr. Speaker, is not only a serious matter as it reflects on the integrity of the Deputy Premier but also reflects on the integrity of the Lougheed government in total. Therefore, Mr. speaker, I believe it is incumbent for the Deputy Premier and hon. Minister of Agriculture to apologize to this House for his misleading statement. DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, after having gone through that with such an onerous voice, I wonder whether the Leader of the Opposition is as concerned as he would appear to be, or whether he is making a political ploy.

The situation -- I apologize to the hon. Member for Wainwright for the earlier statement that in fact there wasn't anything in general administration for the task forces. The statement I made last night was correct. head: PRESENTING PETITIONS MR. ASHTON: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition. The petition comes from residents of the hamlet of Sherwood Park. The petition describes some of the history of the unsuccessful guest during the past few years by residents in the hamlet for increased representation on the council of the County of Strathcona No. 20.

The petition concludes with the prayer for increased representation. It contains 3,842 signatures and considering that the petition was conducted on two night blitz with many residents not at home, it appears that it represents an overwhelming confirmation of support for the objective which I have personally pursued for several years. The grievance complained of in the petition no longer exists, as the hon. members are aware. The hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs last week took steps to remedy the situation.

However, because the petition is addressed to the hon. members of this Assembly, it is necessary that I submit it for their information. head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS MR. DOAN: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce a bill, being The Alberta Housing Amendment Act, 1972. The first part of this bill defines a mobile home and what types of mobile units come under this definition. The next

section in the same manner describes what is included in the definition of a mobile home park. Also, with the Housing Corporation becoming highly financed, this act removes the deputy Minister of Municipal Affairs as a director of the corporation and replaces him by the Deputy Provincial Treasurer. Also, under this act, mobile home parks will qualify for loans for construction or improvements. It will also authorize the Housing Corporation to pay grants in lieu of taxes. [Leave being granted Bill No. 44 was introduced and read a first time. ] MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon.

Minister of Public Works that The Alberta Housing Amendment Act, 1972, be placed under Government Bills and Orders. [The motion was passed without debate or dissent.] Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1562

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-3 MR. TRYNCHY: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce a bill, being The Billiard Rooms Amendment Act, 1972. The purpose of this bill is to permit persons between the ages of 14 and 16, with the written consent of parent or guardian, to enter a billiard room. I feel that the above changes will provide many children with a form of recreation which is now not available to them. [Leave being granted, Bill No. 204 was introduced and read a first time.] head: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS MR. YURKO: Mr.

Speaker, I beg leave to introduce to you, sir, and to this House 100 Grade IX students from my constituency from the St. Gabriels School. Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't want the House to think that these young people are angels, but I would like to suggest that they are very bright indeed -- some of Edmonton's finest. They also include the Deputy Minister's son... .[Laughter ].. .I'm sorry, the Deputy Speaker's son. I had another remark, Mr. Speaker, that I was going to make, but I'll refrain from doing so. Mr. Speaker, these 100 students are accompanied by their principal, Mr. Barlage, their assistant principal, Mr.

Paul Stewart, and organizer of the trip, Mrs. Lorraine Seborg, teacher of Grade IX, and Mr. Tomko, Grade IX teacher. I would like to suggest that I'm quite sure that even though they teach at St. Gabriels, they aren't angels either. MR. HARLE: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce to you and through you to the members of this Assembly, some 100 students from my constituency, being some grade VIII and grade IX students from the Stettler Junior High School. They are accompanied by their teachers, Mr. Larry Ambury, Mr. Bob Anderson and Mr. Gerry Weston. They are sitting in the public gallery.

I would ask that they stand and be recognized. CLERK: head: FILING RETURNS AND TABLING REPORTS MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to file the reply to Motion for Return No. 129. MR. WERRY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the 60th Annual Report of the Alberta Government Telephones commission for the calendar year 1971. It might be interesting to the hon. members that this year they have changed the format of the annual report.

Instead of using photographs they have switched over to an artist's concept, and the cost of producing 3,000 copies has been substantially reduced from $1.40 to 93 cents on this new annual report. head: ORAL QUESTION PERIOD MR. RUSTE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Member for St. Paul, Mr. Fluker. My question is relative . . . MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, there is no provision in the rules for addressing a question to a private member during the question period. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1563

27-4 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 MR. RUSTE: Mr. Speaker, I was wanting from this open government a little information on this bill. And as the hon. member had introduced it, have I not the privilege to ask him a question? MR. SPEAKER: I am not aware of any provision for doing it during the question period. But if the hon. member would agree to accept the question during the debate on the bill, that might solve the problem. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, on the point of order, provision is made for questions to ministers or to members who are responsible for some particular item of government under the orders. MR.

GETTY: Mr. Speaker, following that along and the hon. member’s problem regarding a bill, there is a series of five processes which bills go through before they become law. On any one of them the hon. member has every opportunity to ask all the questions he wants. MR. TAYLOR: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs is correct. The hon. member need not reply but there is certainly nothing to stop the question from being asked. MR. FARRAN: Mr.

Speaker, on the point of order, referring to No. 175 in Beauchesne, it says: "The strict rule is that no question can be put by one private member to another except on the Orders of the Day". MR. SPEAKER: May I suggest again, the hon. member, I believe, has indicated his willingness to answer the question when the bill is being debated, or perhaps it could be done in committee. Could we let it go on that basis?

I am aware that there is provision for private members to be asked, or government members who are in charged with a certain government responsibility, but I didn’t construe the rule as including the sponsor or introducer of a bill. MR. HENDERSON: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder on the point of clarification on your ruling, are you making your ruling on the basis of the fact that the hon. member to whom the question is addressed, is a private member of this Assembly as opposed to a cabinet minister, or on the basis of the fact that it is not appropriate in the question period to ask questions about legislation that is before the House? I think it is important that we have it clear on which basis the question is being rejected. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, if I could rise on the point of order that the hon.

Member for Wetaskiwin-Leduc has raised, I think it is certainly quite appropriate that having regard to the fact that legislation has been presented by members who are not members of the Executive Council, to recognize that. I think it also true that there are appropriate circumstances where a private member may be asked a question. I think if we have any objection it is just simply to a specific Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1564

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-5 question regarding a bill during the Oral Question Period. That seems to us perhaps, not the appropriate place. Now there could be, I suggest, Mr. Speaker, a case where the hon. member may want to find some preliminary information on the matter in such a way as to facilitate his understanding of the bill at second reading. With that qualification — I don't want it implied, and I am sure the hon.

Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs didn't want it implied — that on matters involving legislation that have been brought before the House in the name of the member not a member of the Executive Council that we in any way want to create a distinction in that. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, on the point of order, could I read the Alberta Rules 35, on page 13.

"Questions may be placed on the order paper seeking information from ministers relating to public affairs," and then further down, "questions may be placed on the order paper to other members relating to any bill, motion, or other public matter connected with business of the Assembly in which members may be concerned." And I would suggest that the Oral Question Period is a privilege given to us at the discretion of the Speaker. Since it is permissible on the order paper, I would suggest that it should also be permissible in the Oral Question Period. MR.

SPEAKER: Without wishing to establish a precedent, could we, with regard to this particular question and bill, allow the matter to stand so that the question may perhaps be put when the bill comes up for discussion. If the hon. member doesn't get the information at that time I will have had an opportunity to consider the point and we can deal with it then further. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. RUSTE: Mr.

Speaker, what I was wanting to get was additional information that would help us in our judgment at the time of second reading of the bill, and if the hon. member that brought the bill in, isn't prepared, or if the rules don't permit for him to answer my question, maybe I could ask it to the Minister of Agriculture who is directly in charge. May I do so? MR. SPEAKER: Please proceed. The Meat Inspection Act MR. RUSTE: Mr. Speaker, dealing with Bill No. 49, The Meat Inspection Act, will the regulations under

Section 11 of Bill No. 49 be available at the time of second reading? The reason. I ask this is that the regulations themselves constitute 15 clauses while the bill itself is only 12. And I believe it is pretty important to have these as it relates to (1) who pays for the inspections, and (2) what facilities presently being used may or may not be phased out. DR. HORNER: Mr. Speaker, pretty obviously the regulations can't be official until the bill is passed, but I would be quite willing to undertake to make sure that we will have at the time of second reading a Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1565

27-6 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 general answer to what, in fact, will be in the regulations in regard to who is going to pay and the other points that are involved in that area. I am sure the hon. member appreciates that they can’t be official, of course, until the bill is passed. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Spirit River - Fairview followed by the hon. Member for Calgary Bow. New Treasury Branch MR. NOTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Provincial Treasurer. Could he advise the House what he meant in his recent interview about a new kind of Treasury Branch?

By way of explanation I presume that any new type of Treasury Branch would have to be publicly owned and controlled? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the hon. member will clarify the latter part of his question, because I am not sure that I do understand in particular what he is getting at, if he is referring to the news story today with regard to the Bank of Alberta, or if he is referring generally to answers previously given in the House both by the Provincial Treasurer and myself to the question of the future of the Treasury Branch. MR.

NOTLEY: By way of clarification I am referring to the news story today which mentioned both the possibility of the Bank of Alberta and also the hon. Provincial Treasurer is quoted as saying that one of the options might be a new type of Treasury Branch, I am curious as to what he meant by that, and I am wondering if he would clarify that for the Legislature. MR. MINIELY: I think I have said it in the House before, Mr. Speaker, in reply to the hon. member's question, I think the new kind of Treasury Branch at this stage might be inappropriate. First of all, as the

article indicates, we are clearly discussing options in terms of developing a greater capital source for industrial development in Alberta, with respect to the specific statement a new kind of Treasury Branch, I have said before that we see the treasury branches as playing an expanded role in Alberta and that is what my statement would mean taken in context. MR. NOTLEY: A supplementary question. In studying the options, one of which is a new Alberta Bank.

Is the government giving any specific consideration to ensuring that an Alberta Bank would be as responsive to social needs as is the present Treasury Branch system? By way of explanation I'm referring to the decision of the government to loan money on the strength of unemployment insurance cheques and I cite this as an example of the Treasury Branch being socially responsive. Are you considering ways and means of insuring that a chartered bank, which really wouldn't be under the jurisdiction of the province, would be as responsive to social requirements? MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, with regard to the question that the hon. member raises, first of all the matter is stated by the Provincial Treasurer Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1566

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-7 as only one of many options that we’re evaluating. The matter is now on the agenda and in the process of discussion by the Economic Planning Committee of Cabinet. I note the remark by the hon. member of the social responsiveness of any proposed Bank of Alberta or new financial institution, relative to the Treasury Branch, and certainly that’s a factor that has to be weighed in terms of the options.

The only point that I would like to make is that I think it is quite clear that a bank broadly held by Albertans as shareholders may, in our view, have as much responsiveness to the social needs of the province as an institution which is in the same position as the Treasury Branch. So that if there is an implied assumption in the hon. members question, I would like to make it clear that we don’t necessarily accept that assumption, but what we do accept is that that factor of social responsiveness does have to be a major factor in our consideration of the various options open to us. Upgrading 16th Avenue, Calgary.

MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Highways. Have you or your department received a copy of the Calgary Citizens' Advisory Committee Report on the upgrading of 16th Avenue in Calgary? MR. COPITHORNE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm not really familiar whether I have received this submission or not. I am personally behind in some of my mail, and at this time I couldn't say if I had received it or not. MR. WILSON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Was the government consulted in the preparation of this report or did you have any input into the preparation of it? MR.

COPITHORNE: Mr. Speaker, usually in any matters concerning the internal works within the city the council makes the decisions, and if it's in agreement with the plan of arterial roads within the city then we participate in a cost-share program. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Cloverbar, followed by the hon. Member for Bonnyville and the hon. Member for Calgary North Hill. MR. HO LEM: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. minister. You are of course aware that there were several public meetings held in regard to the upgrading of 16th Avenue? MR. COPITHORNE: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I read about the upgrading of 16th Avenue in the newspapers and I presume they are reports emanating from those meetings. MR. HO LEM: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. You are aware that at these meetings there were up to 400 citizens attending to discuss the four alternatives which were presented by the city planners regarding the upgrading of 16th Avenue? And are you aware of the decision made at Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1567

27-8 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 these meetings by the citizens who were present? And what is your department going to do to implement the citizen's wishes? MR. COPITHORNE: Mr. Speaker, as far as the City of Calgary is concerned in regard to 16th Avenue, that is a decision that has to made by their governing body. MR. FARRAN: I would like to ask the hon. minister a supplementary question. Is it not true that the report to which hon. member for Calgary-Bow referred was only delivered to city council on Monday night and reported in yesterdays newspaper, and is it unlikely you would have received it yet? HON.

MEMBERS: Question, question. MR. FARRAN: I said, is that not true, unless the mail service is a little better between Calgary and Edmonton? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Cloverbar. DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs about three short questions. MR. LOUGHEED: One at a time? County of Strathcona Boundaries DR. BUCK: One at a time hon. Premier — you're right. Mr. Speaker the first question I would like to ask the hon. minister is; has there been any representation made by the hamlet of Sherwood Park in asking to incorporate as a city? MR. RUSSELL: No, Mr. Speaker.

DR. BUCK: Second supplementary, can the hon. minister inform the House how he arrived at the figure of adding two more councillors to the County of Strathcona? MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, that figure was arrived at in an attempt to achieve a balance. First of all, most of the councils seem to have an odd number of councillors so that you don't get tied votes.

Secondly, there was a very honest and, I think, well founded concern of the existing county council that they would be "outnumbered”, by members from Sherwood Park if more than three were put on, and within those Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1568

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-9 parameters, trying to get representation directly portional to population. Three was the best number. DR. BUCK: Final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Could the remainder of the County of Strathcona — this is outside the boundaries of Sherwood Park -- could they petition to form a new county and form a new county excluding Sherwood Park? MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I don't know the answer to that question specifically, regarding the existing legislation and I would have to check the correct legislative procedures with respect to that.

I should say, however, that there have been a number of overtures since last September 10th, with respect to changing existing county boundaries in various parts of the province, and the picture overall — over the whole province — is one which we have been looking at because of shifts in population and assessment bases. I would think, if there was a strong desire on the part of the County of Strathcona to form a new boundary that that would have to be received by the government and acted upon — either refused or accepted -- but there are others in the mill as well. MR. BATIUK: Mr. Speaker, to the hon.

Minister of Municipal Affairs. Is the hon. minister aware that the majority of the county council of the County of Strathcona are in Clover Bar and they strenuously opposed additional representation. Yet it seems that the hon. Member for Clover Bar where Sherwood Park is not in his constituency, seems to be so interested. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh! Oh! DR. BUCK: Mr. Speaker, I am trying to ask an honest question to get some information for my constituents, and I think the hon. member can do without a political speech. I want some information for the sake of my constituents. MR. SPEAKER: The hon.

Member for Bonnyville followed by the hon. Member for Calgary Millican and then the hon. Member for Drumheller. Salmon Industry MR. HANSEN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the hon. Minister of Lands and Forests. Could he give us more information on the headline that is in today's Edmonton Journal, "Government May Scrap Salmon Stocking". This is due to the Coho salmon in Cold Lake? I would like to know if he has any more information on that, and also if he could provide the total cost so far with this salmon program at Cold Lake? DR. WARRACK: Mr. Speaker, yes I can. There was an

article in today's Edmonton Journal with reference to this particular experimental program. The introduction of Coho salmon into Cold Lake was begun in 1970 with the objective of establishing a viable sports fishery for Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1569

27-10 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 salmon at Cold Lake. At that time some 93,000 Coho smolts, that is fingerlings, were introduced and held in the Medley River in the hope they would absorb the characteristics of the water, as they call it in the fisheries industry, sufficiently to then go to the lake, and when they mature come back to the river and spawn. In releasing these fingerlings in 1970, the earliest opportunity for this spawning process would occur in 1971, and then with the planting in 1971 the second group would spawn in 1972.

The spawning was not successful at the completion of the first of the two years, and it will be this year that we will have the second part and a more complete analysis in terms of whether this is a way that we can properly and adequately establish a viable sport fishery for Coho salmon in Cold Lake. On the second part of the question I am afraid I don't know the answer but I'd be very happy to find out and make that an undertaking. Oil and Gas Contracts MR. DIXON: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the hon. the Premier. My question is, Mr. Premier, that recent statements by Mr.

Real Boucher, who is the Director General of Energy Resources for the Province of Quebec. He claims that his province is going to demand first call on all frontier Arctic oil and gas and offshore oil and gas for its own use. This statement is causing great concern within the oil and gas industry and could be detrimental to our own Province of Alberta. I wonder if the Premier could assure the House that his government will oppose the action of any province demanding exclusive rights to frontier oil and gas and the offshore oil and gas. MR. LOUGHEED: Mr.

Speaker, that's a very important question and involves, of course, the Department of Mines and Minerals, but also specifically in this case it involves the Government of the Province of Quebec, and for that reason I'd like to refer the answer to the hon. Minister of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs. MR. GETTY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I have had, and our government has had some concern about the reports in the newspaper. I would not like to over-react too much because of the fact that they are newspaper reports and they do sometimes tend to mislead.

Nevertheless, we do have that concern and therefore I intend to raise the matter with representatives of the Government of Quebec so that we will more fully understand what their position is. I think it's been stated before that while we believe eastern Canadian needs should be protected, there are manners in which you may do that, rather than by any artificial methods that might be detrimental to the province and the people of Alberta. One way to protect your legitimate needs would be to enter into long term contracts at realistic prices for the energy commodity.

So we will talk to the representatives of the Government of Quebec and determine exactly what their concerns are and explain our position. MR. DIXON: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. It is not just a newspaper report, hon. minister. There was a meeting as recently as Monday in the City of Calgary between the oil operators -- independent and the majors -- and they are quite concerned.

One of their concerns, and maybe you'd like to enlarge on this for my benefit and for the House, the fact is that a great deal of American capital is being placed in the Arctic to assure a supply for not only Canada, but the United States, and this is one of the great concerns. So I think not only Canada but the whole North American continent will be involved in this issue. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1570

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-11 MR. GETTY: Well I appreciate the size of the problem if it gets to the point that you’ve raised. Certainly, we’ve been talking about this matter ever since the National Energy Board decision in November. I would expect that as additional natural gas becomes available, that natural gas will be fitted into the total needs and surpluses of the country of Canada, and the Province of Alberta will come into that with their surplus also, and that these surpluses then will be considered for export. We have stated this many times.

We would be particularly concerned if it appeared that the Federal Lands on which natural gas which is now appearing to be proven up, would in fact be contracted directly on a rifle-shot type of basis into the United States to the relatively rich markets there, while Alberta natural gas was banked for the future to the low price markets in eastern Canada. MR. DIXON: One more supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. This is regarding another proposal, Mr. Minister that Quebec is advocating that a tax be placed on the export of the present gas in order to help build a pipeline into Quebec.

Now, Quebec as we all know, is the last major population area... MR. SPEAKER: Would the hon. member please come to the question. MR. DIXON: For the benefit of the hon. minister, Mr. Speaker, I thought I'd give him a little background, because he said it was newspaper reports, and I was wondering if his government would also oppose, at this stage at least, placing any extra tax on our present exports in order to conveniently help Quebec get its pipeline? MR. GETTY: Mr.

Speaker, all hon. members are aware that there are constant discussions and speculation about additional taxes, and I don't think we can take any position on a hypothetical matter of whether or not there will be taxes until in fact we know whether there is one proposed. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Drumheller followed by the hon. Member for Olds-Didsbury, and then the hon, Member for Edmonton Norwood. Airline Services MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the hon. Minister of Industry?

Has the government made any representations, or do you have any recent information in connection with airline service between Chicago, Edmonton, and Alaska, between Alberta and Los Angeles, and between Edmonton, Calgary, and Dallas? MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the hon. Member for Drumheller's question, the government itself hasn't, but we are aware that there are some private surveys being made and that there has been considerable work in research regarding the flow patterns of these particular flights. We are conscious of it and are keeping alert.

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1571

27-12 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 MR. TAYLOR: A supplementary. Is the government not planning to make some submission to the Canadian government for transfer to the bilateral discussions? MR. PEACOCK: In answer to that, Mr. Speaker, yes we are and the bilateral — as the hon. member I am sure is quite aware — has been delayed for a considerable length of time. When it comes, we will be prepared. Municipal Boundaries MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs.

In light of the hon. minister's comments today, is the government giving serious consideration to the establishment of a provincial boundaries commission that would, in fact, redraw municipal boundaries in the province? MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has touched on a topic of some magnitude, as I am sure he realizes. When these requests started to come in, I discussed the matter with my Deputy Minister and he gave me the last boundaries commission report which had been done. He was a member of that commission. That is as far as it has gone.

I have had informal talks with the Deputy Minister as to how best to proceed and if whether or not, in the department view, this would be appropriate timing. I propose to take the matter to the Executive Council after the pressures of this current session are over. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. To municipalities asking hon. members about this question, should we advise them that the government will not make a decision on this until following this session of the Legislature? MR. RUSSELL: Mr.

Speaker, I think the hon. member could tell his constituents that the Department of Municipal Affairs is aware of the problems. I can think of about four or five areas, just off hand, that have made representation for changes, but it is not something that can be handled on a piecemeal basis; it is not something that could be handled casually. It is a job of some magnitude and I would hope that that would give you an outline for your answer. MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, one last supplementary question.

To a specific request from a municipality, if a member tells them the government will make a decision on a boundaries commission following the session, is that a fair assessment of the hon. minister's position? MR. RUSSELL: No, it is not, Mr. Speaker. MR. CLARK: Can I ask what a fair assessment would be? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1572

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-13 MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I have tried to outline the magnitude of the problem. I don't even know if the timing is appropriate for such a commission. I have only discussed on an informal basis with my deputy minister, and whether or not it would be taken to the Executive Council with the recommendation that you mentioned, is really hypothetical, so you would have to answer within those parameters. Mr. Speaker, he may wish to add that since 1959 the previous government saw fit to do nothing about it. Misericordia Hospital MRS. CHICHAK: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the hon. Minister of Health and Social Development. I wonder if the hon. minister could inform us as to the progress of the Misericordia Hospital in preparation for the handicapped children, and how soon we might expect a substantial intake of new patients? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for giving me the opportunity of bringing the House up to date on that matter.

Hon. members will recall that during the Throne Speech Debate I was able to report that this new thrust is being completed in the sense of the physical work to be done for receiving patients, to the extent of between 50% and 90% completion on the various floors as at approximately one month ago. The present situation is that although we had hoped to have patients in by about this time, it will be delayed for approximately another two weeks. The work has continued to progress towards completion and arrangements are in the final stages for the transfer of patients at approximately the end of the month. MRS.

CHICHAK: I'd like to ask a supplementary on that. Could the hon. minister tell us then whether at this point new patients are being considered, and on what basis they are being considered? MR. CRAWFORD: Well, the intention for the Misericordia facility, Mr. Speaker, is to bring in patients who can be moved to a facility which does not require the highly specialized intensive care facilities of Red Deer.

And so having regard to the fact that people who are parents and may want to visit patients from time to time live in various parts of the province, the lists are being gone over to see if it can be made the most convenient for ones that live in the Edmonton and central northern vicinities so that when bethe moves are made it will most convenient, not only to the best utilization of the facility, but also to the people who will be personally involved. MR. HENDERSON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. I wonder... MR. SPEAKER: Is it a supplementary? MR. HENDERSON: M isericordia, Mr. Speaker.

Could the minister advise the House as to what use they are going to make of the old centre block in that particular structure — the centre block as opposed to the wings of the building? Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1573

27-14 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, I would have to say that I believe the balance of the structure which is not being used for the purposes I've just described is under an assessment as to whether or not use can be made of it. But whether or not any recommendation is available from the officials as yet, on that, I do not know. MR. HENDERSON: A further supplementary. Do I conclude from that, Mr. Speaker, that the minister is saying that the centre block I referred to is not being used in the present undertaking? MR.

CRAWFORD: My understanding is that only one wing was being used, and it consisted of several floors. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Calgary Buffalo, followed by the hon. Member for Wainwright and the hon. Member for Vegreville and the hon. Member for St. Albert. WHL Franchise MR. GHITTER: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. Minister of Industry and Commerce.

In light of the announcement that the Calgary hockey promoters will apparently be unable to fulfill their commitments with respect to the World Hockey League franchise, and as a result of their inability which has somewhat made Calgary look bad in the eyes of the sporting community, I'm wondering if the promoters of the Calgary franchise could apply for the forthcoming Alberta Opportunities Fund for assistance, if they undertake to only use Alberta hockey players? MR. PEACOCK: I'll get that looked into. MR. GHITTER: A supplementary, Mr.

Speaker, while you're doing that, could you determine whether or not you have any other programs by which the promoters could apply to your department? MR. PEACOCK: I'll do that, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member has a supplementary. MR. LEE: I have a supplementary for the hon. Minister in charge of Tourism. Considering the considerable tourist attention that would be accorded to Calgary from such a franchise, and also considering the fact that Calgary obviously does not qualify for grants as Edmonton well may -- for grants under depressed areas -- is there anything you could do?

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1574

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-15 MR. DOWLING: Well, Mr. Speaker, of course we're going to support anything that would in any way enhance the tourist industry in any part of the province, including Calgary. MR. GHITTER: A further supplemental, Mr. Speaker, this time to the Minister of Culture, Youth and Recreation. I'm wondering if he, too, could look into his programs to determine whether his department could assist the promoters in the City of Calgary? MR. SCHMID: If they are poor promoters, maybe we should try it, Mr. Speaker. Distribution of Budget Estimates MR. RUSTE: Mr.

Speaker, to the Provincial Treasurer. I note that we have received additional copies of your 1972 budget address. My question is, are additional copies of this address available, and will the copies of the estimates of expenditure for the year 1972-73 be available as well? And possibly on a lighter note, are you contemplating undertaking a cost benefit analysis of comparison between the budget material of this year and the previous year as the Telephone Department did? MR. MINIELY: Well, Mr.

Speaker, first of all, I wonder if the hon. member would clarify whether he's talking about the Budget Address presented on March 17th or the subsequent printed copy which is for public distribution? MR. RUSTE: I believe, Mr. Speaker, that the subsequent printing is the recreation of the first one? You had limited numbers of the first one, and then you had a second printing. I mean a copy of that, as well as copies of this, and the capital one. MR. MINIELY: I can't, without going to my department, give you the exact numbers, but the original presented on March 17th is in limited quantities.

The public copy, I think, is around 20,000 copies of that particular one, because it is mailed throughout Alberta, and to other governments in Canada and across Canada. Your third question, I think, is somewhat facetious. My own feeling, as I have clearly indicated in the past, is that for the citizens of Alberta who are interested in the financial affairs and the public understanding of the financial affairs of government, I'm quite happy to provide the number of copies they would require. MR. RUSTE: Mr.

Speaker, just to clarify it then, I understand there will be copies of this made available to those who may require it? MR. MINIELY: I do know that those copies are highly limited in terms of the number printed. There were extra copies available; I can't tell you at this time, because I have been advising members who wanted extra copies, to draw down on them. At this time I can't tell you whether there are, in fact, many of that particular copy left to draw upon. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1575

27-16 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 MR. RUSTE: The final point on this is that actually this is the meat of the thing. It gives an explanation to the public of where the money is going. In the Budget Address it is the general speech,

whereas in here, you have the estimates, appropriations, everything. This is what I think should be made available to the public. MR. MINIELY: Certainly, I am talking about the two budget addresses. There are more copies of the estimates available. If hon. members wish any of them, I would encourage them to ask my department directly for copies, and they would be happy to provide them within their limited availability. Our intent was to print so many of the estimates, and as we required more we would run off more.

The plates are set up and being retained to ensure that anyone who wishes a copy can, in fact, receive a copy, both of the budget address and the estimates. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Vegreville, followed by the hon. Member for St. Albert, then the hon. Member for Lethbridge East, and the hon. Member for Drayton Valley. Marking of Underpasses MR. BATIUK: Mr. Speaker, this question is going to be referred to the hon. Minister of Highways, with reference to the figures indicating the clearance in underpasses. I will have to add a little prefix so he may know the question.

Over this past weekend one of my constituents was stranded for a couple of days on Highway 2 just south of Calgary. He was hauling a load of machinery and the height of his load was 17' 1". He came to an underpass showing a clearance of 16' 8", so he phoned the RCMP to help direct him another way round on the overpass so he could make it. But since it was Saturday afternoon he was advised by the RCMP to wait until Monday morning. When the RCMP came on Monday morning they looked at the load and felt it should be able to make the underpass.

When they did go, and there was a big clearance, they measured the underpass and it was not 16'8"; it was 19' 11" — 39" higher. Mr. Speaker, not only did this man have the inconvenience of staying for two days, there was a little vandalism. But over the past number of years, just think of how much inconvenience has been caused. I wonder whether the hon. Minister of Highways will see that the figures will be corrected. MR. COPITHORNE: Mr. Speaker, I will have this looked into and dealt with. MR. HO LEM: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder, if in circumstances such as this, and if the figures were correct, whether it would be good practice on the part of the person driving the truck to deflate his tires a couple of inches. Over 45 Employment Agency MR. JAMISON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the hon. Minister of Health and Social Development. Has a report come to your Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1576

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-17 attention concerning the success of the activities of the Over 45 group that was recently established in the city of Edmonton? MR. CRAWFORD: Mr. Speaker, hon. members of the House will recall that about a month ago, on March 8th, I announced on behalf of the government, a grant to an organization that was to experiment in the area of finding employment for unemployed employables over 45. This was acknowledged at the time to be experimental only.

I wanted to report to the House today that the Over 45 group opened offices in Edmonton on April 3rd, and we have a report for the first seven days of their operations. I don't know if I am going to be able to commit to report every seven days. I am happy to be able to do this sort of thing as the hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower often does in this House, and that is indicate the success that some of the programs of this government are having in regard to finding employment for Albertans. And the result of the first seven days, Mr.

Speaker, of the operation is that 30 unemployed employables were placed in jobs through the efforts of this group. By way of illustration, one individual who was placed in employment, had been seeking employment through 22 separate job interviews prior to that, and was placed in a job as one of these first 30 within the first week. [Applause] MRS. CHICHAK: Supplementary. I have a supplementary. I wonder, you have indicated that 30 have been placed. Do you have the figures to how many actually applied for assistance to have job applications? MR. CRAWFORD: I do not, Mr. Speaker.

I would be pleased to obtain that figure and provide it. Catelli Strike MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member from Lethbridge East followed by the hon. Member for Drayton Valley. MR. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the hon. Minister of Labour, and it is with regard to the Catelli Plant in Lethbridge. I have a clipping from yesterday's Lethbridge Herald. It says the Department of Labour has yet to make any contact with the union since the lockout began, Mr. Leclerc said "Any government assistance would be welcome in this dispute", and I would like you to comment on this. DR.

HOHOL: Yes, I have the

article and we have a recent report from Lethbridge, Mr. Speaker. The strike vote was taken and the strike vote was favourable. In the meantime the management locked the 58 employees out. Just for information, 55 of the employees voted in favour of the strike; 3 were opposed. The information which they gave the House two days ago, if I can repeat it, is that they were officially in touch with the management offering mediation services. With the union there are other kinds of contacts, sometimes they are with prejudice in the sense that they are official, and some are without prejudice, which are unofficial.

I will follow up on the information which you gave me and I will see that our next contact with the union is official. We are doing everything we can, as a Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1577

27-18 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th, 1972 matter of fact, to bring them both together to a successful conclusion of that particular disagreement. AGT Taxes MR. ZANDER: Mr. Speaker I have a question to the hon. Minister of Telephones. What is the amount of the taxes paid by the Alberta Government Telephones on its property situated on Jasper Avenue and 100th Street? MR. WERRY: I don't have that information with me, Mr. Speaker.

Just as a general point of interest, though, the total taxes that were paid by AGT in Edmonton during the calendar year 1971, amounted to some $634,000 or $645,000 but that included not only the half year for the present building, but also the toll complexes on 100th Avenue and also the exchange in Jasper Place. In addition there were close to $130,000 business taxes paid, so that the total taxes paid to the City of Edmonton for the year was in excess of $760,000. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary.

When the hon. minister is giving the exact figure on the taxation in lieu of taxes, would he also secure the information on what the taxes would be if paid at the regular assessment and regular mill rate? MR. WERRY: Well, the information I have, Mr. Speaker, is that it is not in lieu of taxes. It is property tax because it is a Crown corporation, and it is paid in the same manner as any other corporation or building in Edmonton. MR. SPEAKER: The time for the Question Period has ended. MR. MINIELY: Mr. Speaker, I wonder just before we close it off, there is just one addition to an earlier question.

I would like to say to all hon. members now, the hon. Member from Wainwright has indicated to me in follow-up to his question, that he would like 12 copies of the Budget Address and of the Estimates. It would help us a great deal in the Treasury Department if all the hon. members would advise me as soon as possible in the next few days of the numbers of copies they would like for distribution in their constituency, and we will then have an idea of total quantities that we should be prepared for for the coming year.

If it is left too long it is going to be difficult for us to determine how many quantities we should run off at any particular time. So I'm just asking for the co-operation of members in trying to get these in as quickly as possible and we'll try to supply you with what you would like in terms of distribution. Recycled Paper MR. YURKO: Mr. Speaker, with your permission, if I may, before the question period ends, I would like to answer a question that the hon. Member for Coronation asked several days ago, and I said I would bring the answer.

I believe his question was whether or not there was any type of a depot in his constituency for collecting recycled paper, and in Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1578

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-19 looking into this matter we have not been able to find any depot in his constituency for this purpose. But I would like to advise that there is a contain-away depot for collecting containers - recycled containers, which was established at Big John's Highway Service, Highway 12, Coronation. Airline Services (cont'

d) MR. PEACOCK: On a point of clarification I wouldn't like to leave the House with this very important question that the hon. Member for Drumheller asked that the government has not actively been involved in searching for a ways and means of attracting, in the forthcoming bilateral arrangements, the importance of Alberta being connected with San Francisco, Dallas and Chicago as a stop-over on the Alaska route. And I can assure him that we are very active in this. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. LEITCH: Mr. Speaker, I have an announcement that I would like to make with respect to The Alberta Racing Commission.

I would like to advise the hon. members of the House that effective April 11, 1972 the then members of the racing commission, who were: Mr. Bonham, chairman, Mr. Adams, Vice-chairman, Mr. Bloom a member; were replaced by Mr. Irv Parsons, Mr. Wright, and Mr. Peter Owen. And Mr. Speaker, if I may digress a moment to say that persons who serve on boards and commissions, such as the Racing Commission, for the province, nearly always do so at considerable personal inconvenience and sacrifice. And I would like to offer the provinces thanks to Mr. Bonham, Mr. Adams, and Mr.

Bloom for the very valuable service that they have given the province over a number of years. I should say that Mr. Parsons has had a long association with the Calgary Exhibition and Stampede Board, and was their general manager and executive vice-president in recent years. He is also the president of the Western Canada Racing Association and with that background, Mr. Speaker, he will bring to the Racing Commission a very wide range of experience and knowledge which is necessary when administering the racing activities.

He has, of course, in order to accept the position as chairman of the Racing Commission, severed all connections with the Western Canada Racing Association and with the Calgary Exhibition and Stampede Board. The vice-chairman, Mr. Wright, is from Calgary and has been very active as an owner and breeder of thoroughbreds, and up until just recently he was the president of the Horsemans Benevolent Protective Association and again, like Mr. Parsons, in order to assume his new duties with the Racing Commission he has resigned his position as the president of that association. And again, Mr. Speaker, I believe Mr.

Wright will bring to the commission a very thorough knowledge and understanding of the horseman's problems. The third member of the commission is Mr. Owen, a lawyer from the City of Edmonton, who has practised here for a number of years and is very well known, has a very high standing among the community and members of his profession. Mr. Speaker, as I'm sure most of the hon. members are aware, the Racing Commission operates under rules, pursuant to the Racing Commission legislation, and I believe a lawyer on the commission will be of some assistance in drafting and amending those rules.

But perhaps more important the presence of a lawyer with Mr. Owen's experience is going to be very, very valuable when the Racing Commission deals with disciplinary hearings and things of that nature. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1579

27-20 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons for making the change that I have just announced is that we felt that we wanted the Racing Commission to assume some broader duties and additional responsibilities, particularly in respect to the supervising of all aspects of racing. And after considering the matter for some months we felt that the best way to accomplish this was to appoint the new members to the commission.

I should say that while we have replaced the existing three-man commission with three new members we are still giving consideration to whether additional members ought not to be added to the commission and in particular we are thinking of perhaps someone who would be familiar with the problems of the owners and trainers of the harness-racing, and in addition we may want to appoint someone who isn't really closely connected with any particular part of racing but who might, in a sense, be regarded as a representative of that very important person to racing — the betting fan. head: GOVERNMENT MOTIONS MR.

HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker I move that you do now leave the Chair and the Assembly resolve itself into Committee of the Whole to consider Resolution No. 1 on today's Order Paper, His Honour the Lieutenant Governor having been informed of the subject matter of the motion recommends the same for the consideration of the Assembly. [Motion No. 1 was passed without further debate or dissent.] [The Speaker left the Chair.] *********************** head: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE [Mr. Diachuk took the Chair. ] MR. CHAIRMAN: The Committee of the Whole Assembly will come to order.

Be it resolved that it is expedient to introduce a bill for

an act being The Alberta Opportunity Fund Act. Is it agreed? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Chairman, I move that the resolution be reported. MR. CHAIRMAN: It has been moved by the hon. minister. Is it agreed? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee rise and report the resolution and ask leave to sit again. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1580

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-21 MR. CHAIRMAN: It has been moved that we report? Is it agreed? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. *********************** [Mr. Speaker resumed the Chair.] MR. DIACHUK: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole Assembly has had under consideration the following resolution: Be it resolve that it is expedient to introduce a bill for

an act being The Alberta Opportunity Fund Act, and reports agreement and begs leave to sit again. MR. SPEAKER: Having heard the report and the request for leave, do you all agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I move that the resolution be read a second time. MR. SPEAKER: Moved by the hon. Government House Leader that the resolution be read a second time, do you all agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. head: INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill No. 50: The Alberta Opportunity Fund Act MR. PEACOCK: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to introduce an important bill, being The Alberta Opportunity Fund Act, Bill No. 50.

The purpose of this Act is to give new direction to the economic growth of the province by establishing a $50 million Alberta Opportunity Fund and creating an Alberta opportunity company to administer the funds. With the object of stimulating new and expanding enterprises, priority will be given to Albertans, small businesses, centres of small population, job creating projects, research and development, promotion of marketing and export potential, enhancement of tourist potential, provision of employment and business experience for Alberta students, and encouragement of local development groups.

The program is designed, not only to make funds available for economic growth but to see the funds combined and to supplement monies which will be attracted from conventional sources. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1581

27-22 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 It is intended that the Alberta Opportunity Fund will in this way have a multiple effect upon the flow of capital into this province. Broad terms of reference and flexible approaches to the individual needs, together with greater involvement of the public sector, will serve to accelerate business expansion within the province and this, combined with other forces, which attract business to this province will bring benefits to all the areas of Alberta. MR. SPEAKER: Having heard the hon. minister’s request for leave, do you all agree? HON.

MEMBERS: Agreed. [Leave being granted, Bill No. 50 was introduced and read for the first time] head: COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY MR. HYNDMAN: Mr. Speaker, I move that you do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply for consideration of the Estimates. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Government House Leader has moved that the Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply for consideration of the Estimates. Do you all agree? HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. *********************** COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY [Mr. Diachuk in the Chair] MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Committee of the Assembly will now come to order. HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. Department of the Environment Appropriation No. 2901 Salaries MR. YURKO: Mr. Chairman, it seems appropriate to make some remarks during the course of introduction, or during the course of passage of the department's estimates, and I'd like to take this occasion under or the hon. minister's appropriation to make these remarks.

I would like to say that I did make some remarks in connection with the operation of the department during the Throne Speech debate, and so Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1582

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-23 some of what I'm going to say may, in fact, be repetitious, but most or some will be new. I want to suggest, Mr. Chairman, that ours is a new department, It has not been in operation for a year yet, and it has had growing pains. We have had some difficult spots and some pleasant ones. But I would like to say at this time that I very much appreciate the work of the department during the last year and the assistance it has given me -- a cranky and sometimes stubborn engineer, sometimes very difficult to get along with... SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed. MR.

YURKO: ...but nevertheless, they have certainly put up with me and in this regard I would particularly like to thank Dr. Ballantyne, my assistant deputy. I would also like to suggest at this time that my office has two secretaries, and I don't recall the two secretaries having a spare moment in the seven months that they have been with me. We have indeed been busy. Mr.

Chairman, during the Throne Speech debate I spoke to some degree on the new directions and the new thrusts of the department, where we are going and perhaps how fast, and on the balance of the department and the fact that the department was not only concerned with the environment, but in this consideration it was concerned with job creation. I think I would like to review very quickly some of the things that happened to the department in the last year, particularly some of the reorganization that went on, and that this bears directly on the estimates.

I'd like to indicate to the House that we took over The Ground Water Control Act, The Surface Reclamation Act, The Beverage Containers Act, The Agricultural Chemicals Act, and the Environment Conservation Authority was brought directly under the Minister of the Environment. Now with these new Acts, of course, we took on new people and new responsibilities but nevertheless we also transferred some matters out of the department.

The Land Development Branch of the Water Resources Division was transferred to the Department of Agriculture in connection with a thrust — a new Department of Agriculture thrust in this area.

The Districts Drainage Act was also transferred out of the department to the Department of Agriculture, and also, there had been a change devised in the role of the irrigation secretariat in relation to the technical services supplied by my department, and this was done to give the secretariat more direct control over some of the extensive work In the area of broad policy and basic policies, at the expense of sounding repetitious, I would like to make some general remarks in several areas here; particularly in the area of pollution control, water resource management, also in the area of intergovernmental co- ordination, and also to say something about research -- the research division of the Department of the Environment.

In the area of pollution control we set for ourselves some very broad objectives very early, which we believe have been time tested now and indicate the soundness of our decisions. I would like to suggest that the first one that we undertook was the task of creating a climate of responsibility and awareness for environmental problems and to instigate preventative methods wherever possible. This idea of prevention will be running through much of our legislation as well as many of the programs that we will in fact undertake and have in hand in the department today.

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1583

27-24 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 The second area that we felt was necessary was to establish a level of understanding of the problems before us, and those that are expected to arise because of urbanization and resource development and so forth. We felt that we would do this through research and study at an early enough stage to prevent the need for panic solutions. As a result, it will be noted that my department has instigated a large number of studies. These studies were done in order to give us this lead time in thinking and this lead time for action where necessary.

Thirdly we of course, also indicated that there was a dire need to establish meaningful legislation and regulations which are enforceable, and established a method required for adequate enforcement, and in this result it will be noted that there is a substantial manpower increase in certain areas. We also recognize that there is a need for some new directions, and particularly in the area of smoke.

We recognize that our smoke regulations and legislation was unenforceable and we are taking new thrusts in that area and we are going to follow the Ontario lead of establishing, or bringing into the province — through training — certified smoke readers, which will have recognition under the act. Fourthly, we have also indicate through long and short range planning, balanced environmental preservation against resource development, and to adopt such management practices as to maintain our renewable resources in perpetuity and maintain a healthful and quality environment.

In the area of relationships between the province and the federal government, it is generally my philosophy that the area of research should basically be handled by the federal government, though there is room for research in the provincial jurisdiction in matters of the environment.

In the area of standards, generally the philosophy that I have and my department has, is, this is an area for federal involvement -- that is standards and criteria — and basically that the provincial standards and criteria should never be lesser than the federal ones, but in fact in every case where we use provincial standards rather than federal standards, they should be tougher. In the area of monitoring we think basically that this is a provincial concern to a large degree, although there are areas where, in the federal jurisdiction can intrude.

In the area of enforcement, we think this is a provincial and municipal responsibility to a very large degree. We don’t feel that the federal government has much of a role to play in this area. In public relations, this is a responsibility for all levels of government, and of course, in the upgrading of standards and overall planning and management and environmental prevention, this is an area for senior levels of government.

We have several people from our department on several active committees, several government committees, in connection with the establishment of federal standards for various industries, as well as general air pollution criteria and standards, and also water pollution criteria and standards. We, of course, have recognized that in order to get meaningful thrusts in various areas in pollution control, we have had to establish certain policies, and we have established certain policies.

The first, of course, was to centralize authority within the Department of the Environment and in this area of standards and approvals, there have been or will be revisions in legislation to define the roles of the Energy Resources Conservation Board as vis-a- vis the Department of the Environment. We recognize, of course, that pollution must be controlled at the source if it's to be meaningful, and this is one of our policies. We have a sewage control program which I'll mention later on. We also recognize that the polluter Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1584

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-25 must pay, and he must pay at the earliest link in the chain, if we are to be successful in this area. This is, of course, a policy of our department. A very important policy of our department is to legislate or regulate out of existence secrecy and confidentiality enjoyed by polluters. In this regard we will make every attempt to provide information to the public and release information regardless of the consequences, except where confidence of a very important nature may be breached.

We recognize that there is a real need to involve the public in environmental management to the greatest possible degree, and here, of course, the role of the Environment Conservation Authority will be paramount and we have established a large number of hearings in this area, some in new directions. We, of course, recognize that there is a need to initiate land use regulation on a provincial or regional basis.

There is an ever increasing need to set aside areas in which the influence of man and his machines could be limited and regulated, and this is tied into legislation which involves wilderness areas and restricted development areas. In the area of water resources, I would like to suggest to the House that we took over a division of our department that was functioning very well. This division of course, is a very large division, and it is functioning in an area of considerable complication and in an area of increasing conflict in society — conflict between peoples, and conflict between jurisdictions.

I would like to suggest that the former government's policies and programs were relatively good, and most of these policies and programs are being followed with the exception of certain areas. In certain areas I want to suggest, though the previous government's intentions were good, sometimes, perhaps they were a little misguided and there was need for some new directions, and we have taken new directions and new policy thrusts, or are contemplating new policy thrusts in a lot of areas, some of which I intent to touch on.

In the area of intergovernmental co-operation, particularly between the province of Alberta and other provinces, I want to suggest that in the area of co-operation between the Province of Alberta and the Provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba, there has been a great deal of co-operation and the former government is to be complimented in some of the thrusts that they had taken in this area. I think The Master Water Apportionment Agreement is, in fact, I think a first in Canada, and this apportions the waters between Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

The federal government is, of course, a party to this agreement. However, though I might praise the former government in this area, I certainly have to suggest that in the area of co-operating in the western direction there certainly was a minimum of effort or a minimal thrust in this area. In co-operation with the British Columbia government there appears to have been no ministerial meetings. There have been technical meetings on certain occasions, but certainly no ministerial initiatives. This is rather surprising in that the two governments in Alberta and British Columbia were supposedly of the same stripe.

I would like to say that we have initiated discussion with the Province of British Columbia in this area of water management waters that are contiguous to the two provinces. After some correspondence we have arranged a meeting with the hon. Mr. Walliston, who is the Minister of Lands and Forests and Water Resources. This meeting will occur on April 22nd. He will be coming to Alberta to discuss with myself, the hon. Mr. Getty and the hon. Dr. Allan Warrack to discuss matters we are jointly concerned about. Initially, the meetings will be exploratory in nature.

Basically, we will probably be examining methods by which we could cooperate. We will probably also be examining future communications Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1585

27-26 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 at the ministerial as well as the technical level in connection with water resource management and watershed management, and so forth. In the area of cooperation on the national level there have been a number of thrusts in this field. The Peace-Athabasca Task Force was established about a year ago. Alberta has been represented on this task force and a task force report has been issued. A rock weir was built and we have every indication that at least 60% of the delta will, in fact, be saved or reclaimed.

Also in connection with the federal area of thrust, Alberta of course, is a member of the Canadian Council of Resource and Environmental Ministers. In this regard I attended the meetings in Regina last fall and these were very interesting. One of the major programs that originated from that meeting was The Man and Resources program, about which I will have something to say a little later. We also discussed the Saskatchewan-Nelson River Basin study. This is a supply study.

We had agreed, amongst the various provinces in the federal government, that this study will be completed this year, and the final report will be issued in the fall of this year sometime. Then the Saskatchewan-Nelson River Basin Board will be dissolved, approximately at the end of 1972. There was at that time, some consideration given to water use and quality studies, but it was recognized that this was perhaps more within the framework of provincial jurisdiction rather than federal jurisdiction. However, the federal government is extremely interested in this area, and does want to get involved.

They have undertaken and have engaged a company which will examine or attempt to lay a base for a study in this area, which might be undertaken by the Prairie Provinces Water Board if, in fact, one becomes advisable. I do want to suggest there is a realization that the establishment of water use classification is basically a provincial responsibility. This is better done on a provincial basis rather than on a national basis, and can, to a very large degree, affect the growth on a regional and provincial basis.

We also recognize that the establishment of the priority of water use is again basically a provincial responsibility and the establishment of a water use priority chart has been established through The Water Resources Act. Basically, we consider the domestic use to be the prime importance, followed by municipal use, thirdly, industrial use, fourth, for irrigation purposes, fifth, for water power purposes, and sixth, for other uses. One of the most important aspects of provincial jurisdiction is the priority of water use.

I indicated this in the past, that the priority of water use must in the essence be established to a large degree on a provincial basis, in that it directly affects the well- being of the province. The fourth area, of course, is the changing of a priority of use where, a lower use can be upgraded so that a body of water can then be considered to be primarily to be used for recreation, rather than say, industrial use. In this area we also consider that this is basically an area of provincial jurisdiction.

In the area of apportionment, this is an area of provincial jurisdiction as well as federal jurisdiction, apportionment being done on the provincial basis as well as on a national basis. The provincial government has, of course, established some overall objectives in connection with water resource management and I have had occasion to indicate what these were in the House before, but I think I will go through them again for the simple reason that they bear directly on some of the matters before us, and some of the appropriations before us.

And the government, of course, issued Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1586

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-27 these overall objectives in the form of a news release last fall, and I would like to go through them very quickly. The Government of Alberta considers that it is in the public interest of Alberta to expend considerable effort and monies in definition, conservation, management and utilization of Alberta's water resources in the direct interest of Alberta and Canada.

Furthermore, the Alberta government considers that when consideration of all uses of Alberta's fresh water resources are related to the present and future demands of its citizens, that there are no surplus waters in Alberta. In addition the Alberta government considers that the present and future priority of water use should be established on provincial and interprovincial basis without influence by or from international considerations.

The Government of Alberta has placed a moratorium on the use of provincial government funds for use either in part or in total for funding studies that involve the diversion of Alberta surface waters for export beyond the Canadian borders. Also the Alberta government has adopted the policy that each major empoundment and or major inter-basin diversion of water would have to be authorized by a separate act of the Legislature and this policy is being incorporated in the appropriate statute.

Lastly, with respect to water resource management the Government of Alberta will study and manage the resources on an individual water basin basis. Each major river drainage basin will be highlighted as an area for continuing water quantity and quality studies, use allocation and priority, use classification, and overall management of existing supplies for optimum use in conservation. Government policies will encourage efficient and optimum use of the water resources within all river drainage basins.

Intravasion diversions will be studied and implemented where publicly desirable, however inter-basin diversion studies and implementation will generally have low priority. It is the intention of the Government of Alberta to develop a mechanism for public participation and public hearings in the planning process. It is expected that overall planning will be done on a regional or watershed basin basis as well as on an overall provincial basis.

It is the intent of the government to establish water management regulatory bodies on a regional basis, so that local and regional input into the management process can be increased. We are thinking of watershed basin commissions in this regard. Framed within the overall government policy, the Department of Environment is actively formulating an overall water management plan for Alberta, hereafter referred to as the Alberta Water Management Plan.

In accord with the overall Water Management Plan, the Government of Alberta will establish specific policy guidelines in a number of area involving cost sharing arrangementss between government as well as priority classifications of project implementation. In the area of water resources in policies and programs, basically the programs undertaken by the previous government are continuing.

In the interest of time I had the department summarize these all in the manual and I am prepared to table these if the hon. members are interested, but this is the size of the report of all the projects that are presently under the jurisdiction of the Water Resources Division. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1587

27-28 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 These programs, of course, are being done within the framework of the following factors: 1. That water is the property of the province. 2. The best interests of Albertans are served. 3. As far as possible equitable treatment is provided for all Albertans. 4. No person would be deprived of his water rights without proper compensation. 5. The support and integrated management approach regarding both surface and ground water management, and the Ground Water Act, will be incorporated within the Water Resources Act. 6.

The overall objective is to provide the best available information whereby society could exercise value judgments and conferring alternatives. Now the projects are many and they are basically in the foilwing areas: flood control, lake stabilization, river bank stabilization, surface drainage, water supply, erosion, and overall planning. The Alberta Water Management Plan, of course, has to a large degree divorced itself from the umbrella feature of prime, which involved massive diversion from the northern waters to the south, and our policy is basically one of management on the river basin basis.

In the area of new policies, in the area of cost sharing, we of course are working very actively and have for government a new cost sharing policy in the area of lake stablization. We have completed a documentation of virtually every lake in Alberta and classified it according to shoreline ownership. The type of policy that we are considering is related to shoreline ownership. The second area, of course, of a new policy and the new thrust in the area of cost sharing is in sewer plant construction and facilities. And in this area we hope to establish a policy which will provide assistance in several areas.

First of all in connection with communities that are growing very rapidly and require a very large capital expenditure to put in new facilities. Secondly, assistance, possibly to towns, which in fact are substaining a very high debenture level for sewage facilities. This type of a policy is under active consideration by the government at this time. In the area of domestic water supply to all towns, we are negotiating with the federal government in connection with the program here, regarding assistance to agricultural service centres.

This negotiation is in the advanced state and we hope that before too long we will be able to announce a definitive program in this area. In the area of river and stream, flood control and bank stabilization, the department is working in a policy of cost sharing here and we hope that by the end of this year we will be able to announce a cost sharing policy in this area. A cost sharing policy doesn't necessarily commit the government to programs. A cost sharing program simply says that if the program is undertaken then it can be financed on a certain distribution formula between the various levels of government.

We are, of course, examining very seriously the area of water use fees and we're studying what's being done in other jurisdictions in this matter. This, of course, is something that was talked about and initiated through a discussion and a proposed contract in connection with the Cold Lake reservoir, which supplies water to the town of Wetaskiwin. We are, of course as I indicated examining all the ramifications of the possibility of the instigation of water use fees for water use in Alberta for the various purposes for which it is used.

We, of course, in the area of irrigation works recognize that there is need for a new policy of cost sharing in connection with technical services, consulting services and in this regard it is the intention of my department to continue providing technical services to the various irrigation units, to the maximum degree to which our budgetary allocations will permit. There is, of course, perhaps a new thrust in this area than there had been in the past, assistance given to irrigation districts Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1588

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-29 for employing outside consultants and this, in the future, will not be done through my department, if it's done at all. It will be done through the Department of Agriculture and through the Irrigation Secretariat. However, I would like to suggest that I am sure the irrigation districts as announced, I believe, by the hon. Minister of Agriculture, will be encouraged as frequently as possible to use outside consultants and they have this privilege under the Irrigation Districts Act. My department is also conducting a thorough review of the water power regulations.

This is being done through the help of an inter- departmental committee. I would like, also, to suggest that we are giving consideration to how the Canada Water Act may be implemented in Alberta. In this regard, we have chosen the Red Deer River basin as a base for any negotiations that may occur in this area in the future. We have looked, or are looking, at the Red Deer River basin with respect to total management of the basin.

When we have defined our own parameters and our own requirements then, and only then, will we be approaching the federal government in connection with the Canada Water Act to determine what, in fact, would be involved. We feel we have to lay out a very specific case on the provincial basis before we go to negotiate with the government of Canada in this regard.

In our Intergovernmental Planning Division we have, of course, a Land Assembly program in which we purchase land for reallocation to higher usage, for watershed management, for wildlife habitat, for grazing reserve, forestry, recreation, community pasture assembly, and so forth. Thus far we have purchased $3,338,000 worth of land. We have in this budget $672,360 for this purpose. In connection with the Canada Land Inventory we will hope to finish this year the Foothills Resource Allocation study, which is being financed through my department, I believe there is something like $160,000 allocated in this regard.

We are also negotiating with the federal government to extend this program to the unsettled areas of the province, the settled areas being basically completed. If it is extended to the unsettled areas then basically we expect that the cost will be borne entirely by the federal government. We have under consideration, of course, the Remote Sensing program which is tied into remote sensing photography and which we expect will be part of the Earth Resources Technology satellite and in this regard we are looking at the possibility of establishing an

interpretation centre in the province. We are examining, of course, what our possible and practical role in this regard will be, in connection with the Canada program. We have through the Canadian Council of Resource and Environmental Ministers, undertaken our

part in the Man and Resources program. This is a program which starts at the local level and discussions are held at the local level attempting to define a relationship between man and resources in connection with land, flora, water and fauna. This, of course, is underway at this time and this culminate in a national conference in 1973. I have additional details on this program if the House wishes me to present them. In connection with the Land Surface Conservation Act, we recognize that there was a need to revise the legislation and undertake a major thrust in this area.

The Surface Reclamation Act is being revised and the new act is going to be called The Land Surface Conservation Act. This will concentrate primarily on prevention, as well as control during operation and reclamation. In research on environmental matters, when the department was set up it was envisioned as having a research division of fairly substantial proportions. In our new thinking in this regard, we have Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1589

27-30 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 considered and are leaning very positively towards the establishment of a research secretariat rather than a total research department. We hope that in order to maintain a certain level in connection with the growth of departments in government, we felt it would be sufficient to set up a secretariat, composed basically of five men who would then coordinate research across all departments and agencies of government.

Basically the five that we were thinking of would include one who would coordinate research on watershed management, water quality, lake putrification, and so forth; a second one may perhaps concentrate on coordinating research across all government agencies and departments on the use and dissemination of chemical formulations such as pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, mercury, heavy metals, and so forth. The third man in the secretariat would concern himself with coordinating research basically on flora, fauna and plant life.

A fourth would coordinate research on wildlife studies, and this doesn't only mean coordinating research, but keeping abreast of all the studies being done in Canada and in other countries, in this area. And the last fellow on the secretariat would probably be associated with research into resource recycling, garbage control, land use and so forth. Well now, Mr. Speaker, that very briefly summarizes the new thrusts, the new directions that will be undertaken by my department in the new year — this will be our second year in operation, we have increased substantially the manpower and some appropriations.

I might say at the outset that the total new positions created were 55 but we shall be filling 20 that weren't filled last year, so the total increase to the department will be 75 men. Of the 55 increase 18 are going to be professional, 27 technical, 10 clerical or administrative, and one of them of course, of the professional people, will be a new member of the Environment Conservation Authority which is being increased to four people. I think that that would be sufficient, Mr. Chairman, in outlining the role of the department. MR. FRENCH: I'd just like to ask the hon. minister a question.

Could you repeat the four priorities that you indicated for water use — the four priorities? MR. YURKO: 1. Domestic 2. Municipal 3. Industrial 4. Irrigation 5. Water power 6. Other uses I indicated that we would be having a formula whereby the priority use classification of a body could in fact be changed. This would only be changed with permits for compensation for those that might suffer because of such a change in classification. I want to suggest in certain instances the use may be upgraded and I might give you an example.

The government has indicated that Lake Wabamun would be established or maintained as an area of high quality water for recreational purposes. This of course will have a direct bearing on its use for industrial purposes as well as for power generation. MR. DRAIN: I appreciate the explanation that the hon. minister has given us. I also take note of the amount of thrust he has put into it. I was thinking, in the west side of my constituency, we have what we call the Lewis thrust.

This, of course, is a geological phenomena that occurred when we had the process of pushing from the west which resulted in the Rocky Mountain trench and finally in this Lewis thrust. However, in one particular part of it, despite the fact that this is very consistent geologically, there is a fault. I hope sincerely, in the hon. minister's deliberations, that we do not have Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1590

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-31 cause later on, to come at fault possibly with unrealities in relation to realities. When I speak of these, I speak of bread and butter issues. I think of my own constituency. I am concerned at the present time about the serious financial position in which the coal industry in my area is finding itself. I am concerned that new regulations can be drafted that can tip the balances in a manner that would totally destroy the prosperity of this particular area that I represent.

I had the pleasure of attending some of the public hearings on the environmental impact of surface mining in the Province of Alberta, in Lethbridge. My conclusion there is that the further a person is away from the coal industry, the more expert his expertise is in this particular matter. I have never, in all my life, listened to so many hysterical and ill thought out outbursts as I did at this particular hearing.

This is not to say that the concern was wrong, that the thinking behind that was wrong, or that the intention was wrong, but the direction and the assessment of the problem has never been properly put into perspective. I can safely say here, that one of the new super bombs that they are dropping in Vietnam today does, with one impact, as much damage as has been done by strip mining in the Crowsnest Pass, in its inauguration, 25 years ago.

Strip mining, of course, was initially something that was developed during the war years and did result in several holes in the ground -- that is about the only proper way I can describe it — because of the fact that the machinery was not available or the ground did not specifically lend itself to this type of an operation. There is an environmental impact that probably should never have been. I think it could be said that some of the sins of the coal industry that have been committed in the past, are as black as the product that they produce. This does not mean to say that this situation cannot be rectified.

Certainly I would expect that the hon. minister would approach this problem in the context of reality and thus far he has given me no reason to believe that he is not approaching it in this manner. However, I would be remiss in my responsibilities if I did not outline my thinking on this particular matter. Much has been said about one specific strip mine in the Crowsnest Pass, and I refer to Grassy Mountain. It has been suggested that there has been no rehabilitation taking place there.

The reason for this is quite obvious, because of the fact that this strip mine is dormant, the surface coal has been removed, but there are millions of tons of coal stripped and presently awaiting a market. So quite obviously, you cannot rehabilitate this by covering it over when hopefully a few years down the road, you will be able to find another market for this product. Neither can it be shown that serious damage, or serious ecological damage, has resulted from this.

There has been, of course, the initital problem of run-off and this is a very serious one, in the first process of coal being dumped or refuse being dumped. The following spring, rains will take this, in many cases, down to the valley and it will result in pollution of water to a very serious degree. However, this is the initial stage and this is one season. After that the piles seem to settle and the natural process of filteration in nature does recur. Looking at it over a 20 year cycle, the rehabilitation process will proceed.

There is no significant impact on water, insofar as any operation of coal mining in the Crowsnest Pass is concerned at this time, because the iron run-off from McGillivary Mine has, of course, been contained and has been filtered. There was a study made last summer as a result of the Opportunities of Youth program, of the amount and condition of water in the Crowsnest River, which is the central drainage system for the area that is presently being utilized by the coal mining industry. This was conducted along with studies of the north fork and the south fork of this particular river.

And the interesting thing that was Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1591

27-32 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 discovered was that the total water content of fish in the Crowsnest River was considerably higher than that of the adjoining rivers. Therefore, I am not prepared to buy the contention that the type of coal that we have in the Crowsnest Pass in any way affects fish or fishing. In fact, during the war years, I've seen the Crowsnest River run black of coal to the extent where you couldn't see to the bottom, and in the mornings people would be out there catching fish like mad.

However, it has been indicated that this may have some effect on the reproduction and hatching of eggs, which could well be. It has also been suggested that this is a hazard for wildlife. I can assure you that the Mountain Sheep, at least, have no difficulty in adapting to noise and people, providing they're not shot at. Up on Plateau Mountain, where there's complete accessibility, you can find that there are more Mountain Sheep there today than there was ten years ago, despite the fact that they are visited constantly day by day by trucks servicing oil wells.

Last fall, there was a diamond drill rig set up in that specific area and in the mornings, in order to properly get the drill going, they had to chase the sheep out of the tent they set up around their rig because the sheep moved in there to keep warm. These are facts that I can vouch for. So there is an adaptability for wildlife. I might even cite the impact of the Kaiser operation on game. As a result of their operation, they have fenced in the particular area and posted security guards. The result, of course, was that poaching ceased.

In addition to this, the roadsides were planted to grass which thrived very well, and we now find a situation where there is a game shelter at a strip mine. So here we have two contradictions to the prevailing thinking that sometimes does occur. I do not regard mining, as such, as a great detriment to recreation. I think it's something that sort of supplements the scenery. I do not expect to see any continuation of strip mining in the Crowsnest Pass to any great degree. I would be surprised if there was any more strip mining, on the existing strip mine presently in operation, continued past this year.

This, of course, is because the costs are too high. So when it is suggested that these particular areas be covered over and contoured, one consideration should be given. That is the fact that the underground coal has to be removed. When this situation does occur, you do create a trap situation, such as has occurred in Michel where they buried 11 men about three years ago, resulting in the death of four or five of them. Looking at it from the human element, and looking at it from the people element, if this is significant, I am certainly all for strip mining.

If people are important, and if you do not think people are important, I wish you would visit some of the graveyards in the Crowsnest Pass and look at the tombstones and read the names of those young people, 35 years old, 40 years old, killed in the mines. This is one thing you don't see to a very great degree in strip mining. During the war years, the kill factor, and I have mentioned this before, in relation to the production of 100,000 tons of coal, was one man.

So, when we refer to the horrible destruction on Grassy Mountain, where we dug 2.25 million tons of coal, with the result of killing only one man, and this, I say, was definitely a . . . . We could say there were 21 people who managed to live out their lives as a result of strip mining as such. I expect to see the improvement of underground mining methods if the coal industry is going to survive, and if it does not manage to improve or cut its costs, it will not survive. However, as far as we in the Crowsnest Pass are concerned, we hopefully expect we will be able to carry on with our way of life.

I certainly endorse and appreciate the efforts that are being made to save the quality of life, the environment and all these essential things. But I hope they are reconciled with realities. I hope the hon. Minister of the Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1592

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-33 Environment, who now says he creates employment, although I would not think the hon. Minister of Industry and Tourism would specifically regard that as very — what would we say — great addition to the gross national product of Alberta, would not be classified then, in the ultimate analysis, as that of the minister who created the conditions that affected the mode of living that we have carried on in the Crowsnest Pass for the last four generations. MR. YURKO: Perhaps I may reply, Mr. Chairman, very briefly to the hon. member's remarks.

I would like to suggest to begin with that with respect to the gross national product the coal is there. It has always been there. No one generates wealth, the wealth is there. And the wealth will last. It doesn't all have to be taken out in one, two or ten years. However, I would like to suggest that our approach will always be in the context of reality. In this regard, we will always be looking at what is technically possible, and secondly, what is economically possible and practical. This relates to the time span we use in which to instigate some of our policies and some of our programs.

I recognize that the coal industry is suffering from many causes, the least of which is its effects upon the environment. As a matter of fact, the amount of pressure today that has been placed on this industry in connection with performance has been minimal. Its problems are associated with transportation, with marketing, with quality and high wage practices and union conditions. The least of its problems are associated with environmental conditions up to this point in time.

This, I might say, is also true of the pulp and paper industry and this was put out very dramatically recently in a statement by the manager of the Northwest Pulp and Paper Plant at Hinton. He didn't even mention the environmental problems that he had had, but he did mention all the other problems. One of the most difficult problems he had was wages, and the escalating costs of wages in connection with the development of a resource.

I want to suggest as an Albertan, and as a member charged to some degree to guard the environment of this province, that I do not consider that these difficulties necessarily justify inadequate reclamation procedures, or inadequate strip mining practices, so that some of our water streams are badly contaminated with coal or with different types of metals, sulphur, and so on.

And if the coal industry can't in fact survive, with the instigation of adequate procedures in its practices of mining, and in its practices of reclamation, then perhaps it may consider delaying the development of this resource to some other point in time when in fact, this could be done with adequate reclamation procedures and adequate mining practices. Certainly few people recognize better than I what has happened in the mining industry and what has happened to make strip mining such an attractive proposition today.

But it is a attractive proposition because it has disregarded some of the management practices that it should have instigated from the very beginning. And I do want to suggest at this time, that I can't reconcile in my own mind, the total neglect of the environment because of the fact that an industry is suffering very badly from causes which in fact should be solved. I think the hon. Minister of Industry and Tourism is working very hard in an attempt to solve some of our transportation problems and thereby help with the industry substantially.

He is certainly working very hard to solve some of their marketing problems. And this is the area where I think the thrust should, in fact, be placed, and not necessarily in establishing inadequate environmental practices. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1593

27-34 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 MR. FARRAN: Mr. Chairman .... MR . CHAIRMAN: Yes, Mr. Farran. MR. FARRAN: Mr. Chairman, I confess that I have some sympathy with the fears of the hon. Member for Pincher Creek - Crowsnest. There is hysteria, there is widespread public hysteria on this subject of pollution in the environment. And that is why I think we are very lucky to have a Minister of the Environment who will obviously maintain a proper balance and walk this delicate tightrope of reality between the public hysteria and what is practical.

Since Rachel Carson wrote that book about 10 or 15 years ago, the hysteria has grown in alarming proportions. I mean it is a commendable awakening of the public to the dangers of pollution, but there is a danger also, that the fanaticism will perhaps turn large sections of the public off to the very real dangers of pollution, but also cause great harm to the economy at large. For while these people would like to maintain a high standard of living, they also want to maintain the pristine purity of nature and the two are not totally reconcilable. In other words, you can't always have your cake and eat it.

I don't believe it is wholly possible and I don't believe the hon. Minister of the Environment thinks it is wholly possible for mankind to totally return to the trees. So I think somebody has to recognize that this fanaticism may deny the young people the employment they expect. They have very high expectations of employment and living standards, and in their zeal, they may make the expansion of job providing, a secondary industry, less likely. So in doing this, they might, if they don't maintain balance in reality, cut off their noses to spite their faces.

The very professors who preached the imminence of doomsday who preach that through pollution we are all likely to die in 10 to 30 years — the Member from Edmonton Kingsway was quoting from them the other day — they would be very reluctant to abandon their automobiles for a push bike. They wouldn't want to grow potatoes on a small holding, and take this as a way of life in lieu of teaching or grants from the state, education funds from the state.

They would be very reluctant to accept a cut in wages which might arise from a decline in state revenues because of industry being driven away or driven into a decline or from the extra cost of fighting pollution. I feel confident that with somebody like the hon. Minister for the Environment, Mr. Yurko, at the helm with a steady hand, a balanced approach will be taken. The fact is, of course, that Alberta has very few people.

It's only one-third developed and it's not to be compared with such highly polluted areas as industrial Britain in the last century, or the Ruhr in Germany, or Pittsburgh, New York, San Francisco, or Lost Angeles. Sometimes you get the feeling from the speeches one reads that these people would like to keep up with the Joneses and have problems of the magnitude of these more densely populated areas. But the real fact is, that although pollution is a danger here it's not nearly a danger of the magnitude it might be in these very densely populated areas.

The theme that's being preached in our schools, I believe, is a bad theme. They preach to the children that there is no hope, that within 30 years of so, maybe by 1984 we will all die of asphyxiation from all that carbon monoxide, or from plankton being killed or not giving off enough oxygen, from insecticides, from pesticides, from hunger, from something. Well I think this is wrong, the real message is that mankind is a rational animal and there is hope; there's always hope. Of course the mistake they make is a very simple one. Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1594

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-35 That although we may harm nature and we can cause damage and there's every reason for real concern, nature is too big to be knocked over that easily. Some of the things they talk about have no more significance than a mosquito or perhaps you might use another analogy — a cloud seeding aircraft in a thunder cloud. The famous Lord Boyd Orr in 1946, who founded the World Food Organization claimed that within 20 years we would all be dead from hunger.

He'd made the same arithmetical error that Malthus made many years before him and he had calculated population figures and applied geometrical progression to them and said that the earth just wouldn't support them within 20 years, but this was nonsense of course. He didn't recognize that over-population occurs mainly in the fertile river valleys of Asia. Historically, these people have not even spilled over from their densely populated areas into the more sparsely populated areas nearby.

Of course it's of concern, but to try and apply these facts, the fact that there may be over-population in the Valley of the Nile or the Euphrates, to empty Canada, is really stretching a point. It can have very little real moment in Canada. So I just could not buy the philosophy of the zero population fanatic so far as Canada is concerned. Even on a world scale I believe one has to take into account the great advances, scientific advances made in agriculture; people like Professor Borg who multiplied the yield of crops in Mexico by seven times over a very short period with new strains of grain.

The answer is really that there is always hope. This department is important, very important, because if it didn't exist perhaps these zealots would take over and we really would all have to go back to the trees. There has to be somebody who walks the balanced line between what is desirable from an economic point of view and what is desirable from the point of view of maintaining our environment. I believe that this is a good budget and that we have an extremely competent minister in charge. MR. NOTLEY: Mr.

Chairman, first of all let me say that I appreciate the minister's very comprehensive introduction of the estimates. I found many of the points that he raised extremely useful. Several short points before I make some general observations. First of all with respect to the Environment Conservation Authority — the hon. member for Wainwright asked a question several days ago concerning the replacement of Mr. Babey. I would just like to second the proposition he made and emphasize it as strongly as I can that I think it would be useful if the replacement for Mr. Babey was someone from the farm community.

I think the farm people in this province have a real stake in environmental concerns and it would be, as I say, carrying on what was a first rate precedent, in my judgement, by replacing Mr. Babey with a person of similar high standing in the rural community. In making general comments on this subject I want to say just a word or two in defense of environmentalists. The hon. Member for Calgary North Hill, in a very eloquent speech, took a bit of a swipe at them and I think we must counter it by pointing out that the present concern for the environment is in no small part due, Mr.

Chairman, to the many pollution groups who have done a great deal of work in promoting among the public a reasonable and a rational understanding of many of the environmental consequences of actions that we take today. Now, admittedly, among any group, you are going to find some people who go overboard. By the same token, I think it is also fair to say, Mr. Chairman, there has tended among certain groups to be a reaction, an unnecessarily conservative reactionary reaction, if I might play on words, to the excesses of some of our environmentalists. The reasonable ground is, perhaps, somewhere in between.

Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1595

27-36 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 Let me suggest to you that many of the comments that our environmentalists are making are not as far off base as we might think, especially when we look at what has happened in other parts of the world. Since the hon. Member for Calgary North Hill ranged as far as the Nile Valley perhaps he will permit me to range as far as eastern Canada and the United States. We can see the problems of just not sufficient concern over the environmental consequences of actions taken in the past. And, of course, Mr.

Chairman, in the United States it is interesting to note that the president of that country, who I may not agree with on social policy — but I think that most of the members of this House would recognize that he is a very practical man — introduced in his State of the Union address to the congress of the United States, a mammoth war on pollution costing many, many billions of dollars. One of the things I agree with in the hon. minister's introduction is the emphasis that is going to be placed on prevention.

We are in a position today where, while there has been some damage to the environment, it has not reached anything like the problems elsewhere in North America or certainly in other parts of the world. That is perhaps one of the major reasons why I think we have to be cognizant of the dangers. It's one of the major reasons why I think many of us can be quite appreciative of the fact that the various environmentalists groups in this province have had a great deal of impact bringing public opinion to the point where governments have had to move.

I think the very department whose estimates we are considering today, is at least, in part, the result of the activities of these groups. I would like to say I share the confidence of other members that we have an extremely competent minister who is going to persue the administration of this department with a zealist concern for his responsibilities. I also want to say that I think the former government is to be complimented for bringing in the department in the first place. But having said that I think that it is very important, Mr.

Chairman, that while we discuss the pros and cons of the various groups who are promoting pollution control or are very concerned about the impact on the environment, that perhaps we recognize that far from being composed of a group of extremists who are saying irresponsible things, that quite frankly, these groups in the main are making sane statements. MR. NOTLEY: You know I think we have to challenge this proposition that growth is somehow synonymous with progress.

As we recognize that the resources of the world are clearly finite, it follows, that intelligent people must recognize the need for some form of reasonable control. I think the government is recognizing this in the programs enunciated by the hon. minister. There are a couple of other points that were raised. I was pleased to hear him say that the government accepts the proposition of polluters paying.

Quite frankly when the decision was made about a year and a half ago in relation to the Procter & Gamble Pulp Mill in Grande Prairie where a considerable portion of the pollution control costs were picked up by the province, I thought that was a mistake. And I think that this sort of thing should be avoided in the future. There is one other event that actually took place last summer that I’d like to comment on. This is the Shell Oil decision where the Shell Oil Company settled out of court with a number of ranchers in the Pincher Creek area. Now the two points I'd like to make about that out of court settlement.

One is a positive point. I think that it's a hopeful sign when a large corporation like Shell Oil recognizes its' social responsibility, and makes an out-of-court settlement. The second point, however, is that knowing a little bit Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1596

April 12th 1972 ALBERTA HANSARD 27-37 about the protracted problem faced by the ranchers in the Pincher Creek area, the fact that they tried for so many years to get some sort of elementary justice in their case, this issue clearly illustrates the need for much stronger anti-pollution control and administration. I'd like to say just a word or two about strip mining. I share some of the concerns raised by the hon. Member for Pincher Creek- Crowsnest.

We often agree on many things, as a matter of fact, at times I said I don't think I could really bring him into the New Democratic Party because I'm convinced he'd be part of the waffle caucus. But, on this particular issue, I think that it's probably necessary for me to differ in part with his observations.

It's my view that we have to have pretty stringent reclamation standards and I must confess that I agree with the hon. minister that if the coal industry simply cannot bear the expense of reasonable reclamation standards, then I think that we would be ill-advised to disregard the pollution controls necessary in order to maintain strip mining operations. I think that the total environmental consequences for the province as a whole have to assume a greater importance.

If this means that we have to, perhaps through the Alberta Opportunities Fund or some other course of action, make assistance available to an area that is especially hard hit, it seems to me that that would be a more prudent course. I suggest again that I'm talking about reasonable reclamation standards — I don't share the view that we should be pursuing standards which would clearly run the coal mining operations out of business. I don't think anyone suggests this and for the most part, I don't believe that the various conservation groups are saying that either.

They do want to avoid what has taken place in the Applachian areas of eastern United States — I think most of us certainly would concur in that. While I'm on my feet, since the hon. member for Pincher C r e e k - C r o w s n e s t dealt in large measure with local issues, I guess I would be somewhat remiss if I didn't take this opportunity to say something about the proposals made by Wild Kakwa. I raised this in the Question Period the other day and wasn't entirely satisfied with the minister's response to my question.

Wild Kakwa for those who are not familiar with it, is a Grande Prairie based conservation group. They make two major requests. One is for 100 square miles to be set aside as a wilderness area south of Grande Prairie, and another is for the setting aside of 20 townships, or approximately 20 townships as a restricted development area. I might say that in the Peace River country, Mr. Chairman, that the response to the submission made by Wild Kakwa has been very, very widespread and I am sure the hon. Member for Grande Prairie will agree with me that there is a good deal of public support for their proposals.

And I just want to take this opportunity in the Assembly to say that I think the hon. minister should be looking very carefully at these recommendations and that I personally support them. Just before I close, and again I refer to the hon. Member for Calgary North Hill, who as I said, got as far away from Alberta as the Nile River. If he can do that within the length and breadth of our discussion, perhaps you will permit me, Mr. Chairman, to make an observation which is perhaps equally irrevelant to the discussion at hand.

It is something which is clearly under federal jurisdiction, but it does deal with the environment. I am referring to the chemical and biological testing station at Suffield. As the hon. minister is no doubt aware, quite a number of groups in the province have requested, or have argued that Suffield should be turned into a pollution control testing centre.

Quite frankly, I am not an expert in the field of pollution control or environmental research, but some of the people who I respect for their views and their expertise in this area have indicated to me that Suffield would be well suited for this kind of pursuit. May I say that — and this I recognize is Alternate page number, consecutive for the 17th Legislature, 1st Session: page 1597

27-38 ALBERTA HANSARD April 12th 1972 clearly out of order, but I have been an opponent of chemical and biological warfare testing for so many years, and so maybe you will permit me just a little opportunity to squeeze this into the debate. I think it is inconsistent with the Geneva accord, but that is not really the point I wanted to make. It seems to me that our government has, from time to time, made pretty forceable representations to Ottawa on things they felt should be dealt with, even if those things were clearly under federal jurisdiction.

Quite frankly, as a recommendation, I would like the government to consider whether or not it is not time for us to look at Suffield and perhaps follow this advice from the groups involved, and see if we couldn't lead the way in North America — lead the way in the world and turn Suffield into an experimental research station to inquire into the envirormenta1 consequences of many of the things that we do today in our present society. In general then, Mr.

Chairman, may I conclude by saying that I concur in the main with the thrusts — we perhaps use that word too often in this Assembly — but I concur in the main with the direction that the government is taking. I think that it is a tribute and I close on this. Moreover it is at least in part a tribute to those very groups who some of the hon. members claim are impractical and overly idealistic.

I think the fact that they have now managed to pressure one government and, to introduce a department of the environment by their influence, force another government to improve it, that that is not only testimony to their idealism, but perhaps testimony to their solid practicality as well. MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I want to say a few words in connection with the general matter of the environment too. I enjoyed the address of the hon. Member for Calgary North Hill, and I certainly agree when he says that you can't have your Kate and Edith too. I tried to and I lost both Kate and Edith.

An excellent example, however, of what he was mentioning can be found in the Drumheller Valley, where a permit was given by the right of entry arbitration board to strip-mine along the Dinosaur Trail, even over the objections of many people. As a result, the beautiful structure of the hills that had taken hundreds of years to develop was destroyed in places and became a scar. It doesn't matter what is done, that can never really be reclaimed. I think it illustrates the importance in strip-mining excavation of gravel and so on, to establish whether or not you can have reclamation if the project goes on. T