March 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 473 Legislative Assembly of Alberta Title: Thursday, March 13, 2003 1:30 p.m. Date: 2003/03/13 [The Speaker in the chair] head : Prayers The Speaker: Good afternoon. Let us pray. Dear God, auth or of all wisdom, knowledge, and understanding, we ask Thy guidance in order that truth and justice may prevail in all our judgments. Amen. Please be seated. head : Introducti on of Visit ors The Speaker: The hon. Member for Cardston-Taber-Warner. Mr. Jacobs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to intro duce to you and through you to all members of this Assembly someone who really needs no introduction. Mr. Jack Ady is with us today. He sat in this Assembly as an elected Member for Cardston-Chief Mountain for three terms. During that time he was my MLA, and I can tell you and the members that he was considered by his constituents to be a very, very good MLA . I’m pleased t hat he’s here today, and on behalf of this Assembly I would like to extend our thanks to him for the service he’s rendered to this Assembly and to Alberta and to his community. He’s in your gallery. I would inv ite Mr.

Jack Ady to rise and receive the warm welcome of this Assembly. head : Introduction of G uests The Speaker: The hon. Member for Airdrie-Rocky View. Ms Haley: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s a real pleasure for me to be ab le t o in troduce to you a nd t hrough yo u to th e Assembly four guests that are in the members’ gallery today. The first and most important, of course, is Abigail, who is just a little girl but a very, very special little girl. She happens to be the daughter of Jennifer. She is sitting on her mom’s knee up there.

They happen to be the wife and daughter of Frank Ostlinger, who is a member of our government members’ research staff, who originally came to us from Sweden, spent some time in the United States, and decided that he wanted to learn more about political things between Canada and the U.S., came up here and took his political science degree, also went on and took information systems and librar ies. He’s got his masters in that. We e nded up with him as one of our incredibly talented research staff, just a huge addition to us. But the real reason that the three of the m are here today, Mr .

Speaker, is the fourth guest that’s with them, who is Sven – these are all Ostlinger family – and Sven is from Sweden. He originally was a marine with Sweden, later became a high school teacher, decided that he’d not had quite enough of the military and applied through the United Nations to become a member of the peacekeeping forces. So he’s an encryption specialist and a sergeant now with the United Nations. He’s stationed – and I’ll probably say this wro ng – at Prizren, Kosovo, at Camp Victoria, where he serves now. He’s on leave and cam e to visit his brother and famil y for two weeks.

I would ask them to please rise in our gallery, and we could all give them the traditional warm welcome. The Speaker: The hon. Deputy Speaker. Mr. Tannas: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to introduce to you three different groups. The first group is 33 studen ts who are here today as participants in Mr. Speaker’s MLA-for-a-Day program. They’ve spent time at t heir member’s office a nd with y ou in the Chamber, and they will receive a tour and briefings on the constitu- ent elements of this House later this afternoon. This program will be run again on Thursday, April 10.

The ultimate aim of the day’s activities is to further develop the interest and understanding of our parliamentary system among our student guests. Our student shadow colleagues are seated in both galleries, and I would now ask them to rise and receive the traditional warm welcome of this Assembly. My second introduction, Mr. Speaker, is a group of students from Edison school, just outside o f Okotok s. They’re great students.

There are about 25 students and parents with teachers Joseph Smith and Jennifer Harriman and par ents Mike Far rier, Stepha nie Orr, Krista Smith, Blair Murray, Nigel Waugh, A lnoor Ran a, B rad Cennon, and Brent Spice. I’d ask those students to please rise and receive the warm traditi onal welcome of this Ass embly. They ’re over there. My third introduction, Mr. Speaker, is on your behalf. I’d like to introduce, again, to you and through you to all the hon. members of the Assembly Mr. Brad Watson, town manager of the town of Swan Hills.

He’s accompanied today by his w ife, Louise Watson, and their daughter Ellie Watson. They’re seated in your ga llery this afternoon, and I’d ask them to rise and receive the warm traditional welcome of the Assembly. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Economic Development. Mr. Norris: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It gives me a great deal of pleasure today to rise and introduce to you and through you a very special guest sitting in your gallery. My sister Sheilagh Ross and her family from Camrose are visiting us today. Aside from the obvious reasons, t his is a remarkab le family. Th ey are.

My goddaughter Jennifer underwent a liver transplant 10 years ago and is now the longest surviving liver transplant patient in Canada. To honour that remarkable journey, my two nephews, Mike and Tim, who tower ov er me at six f oot six and six foot five respectively, skated across C anada to ra ise awareness for orga n donation. The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose will be doing a member’s statement later about that, but I w ould l ike you to welcome my family to your g allery and give them the warm welcome and the honour they deserve. The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr.

Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to introduce to you and through y ou to mem bers of t he Assembly a grou p of people whom I had the pleasure of meeting with today to discuss issues of concern in our community. Mr. Randy Atkinson, Mr. Murray Dorin, Mr. Ramsey Mackinnon, Mr. Wy nn Payne, Mr . Ted Shi elds, Mr. James Spalding, Blaise Szekely are all sea ted in the members’ gallery, and I’ll ask them to rise a nd receive t he traditional warm welcome of the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Bow. Ms DeLong: Thank you, M r. Speaker.

Throu gh you it give s me great pleasure to welcome five dedicated and wonderful University of Calgary students to our Assembly this afternoon. I’d like to ask each of them to rise a s I call their name: Jennifer Banks, Connie Bird, Kathleen White, Kent Saga, Layne Douglas. They’re all social work students at the University of Calgary, and they’re all stopping

474 Alberta Hansard March 13, 2003 in to see the excitement of the Legislature on the way to the Alberta Association of Social Worker s confer ence in Edm onton this weekend. Two of these students, Ms Banks and Ms Bir d, call the constituency of Calgary-Bow home; however, I would like to wish each and every one of them the best of success as they begin their careers as social workers here in Alberta. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Shaw, the daughter-in- law of Mr. Jack Ady. Mrs. Ady: Thank you. The favourite daughter-in-law. It’s on the record. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As you know , I have 25, 000 students in my constituency, but rarely do they get to come up here. It’s only the second time in the two years I’ve served. I’m proud to be able to introduce them today from Trinity Christian school and the parents. Their teacher is Mr. George Graffunder, and the parents that were brave enough to travel that far with them: Eileen Gaetz, Mary Zwingli, Monique Evans, Hazel Gunn, Linda Thiessen, Jayne Barnett, Jayne Walker, Angela Rankel, Charlotte Loeppky, Kathleen Lefevre, and Scott Dykes.

I’d ask that they would please rise and receive the warm welcome of the House. 1:40head : Oral Quest ion Peri od The Speaker: First Official Opposition ma in question. T he hon. Leader of the Official Opposition. Heritage Savings Trust Fund Dr. Nicol: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This governme nt will stop at nothing to get permission from Albertans to use the heritage fund. Today this government claimed th at a nonsci entific survey will provide direction for the future of the heritage fund, a fund that all Albertans hold dear.

Despite the e xistence of scientific proof that Albertans want their heritage fund to remain an endowment fund, this government has left the door open to raiding the heritage fund. My question is to the Premier. Will you honour your pledge made to Albertans in 1993 when you said, and I quote, this is something that’s so important it ought to go to a referendum, close quote, and hold a referendum before introducing any changes in the way the heritage fund is managed? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, I would like to set the record straight.

First of all, the Mi nister of Revenue set out to c onsult the pu blic as t o what they would like to see done with the heritage savings trust fund. All he did today was release the results of that survey. There is no action being contemplated by this government vis-à-v is the fund because, ostensibly, people said, “Leave the fund alone,” albeit the survey said by 51 percent, a very, very slim majority, that a portion of the fund should be used to pay down the debt.

Well, some time ago we re jected tha t idea and i ntroduced, ins tead, a new fiscal policy, which will be outlined in detai l in c onjunction wit h the budget and the business plans. So this hon. member is getting way, way ahead of himself, but not surprising for political reas ons to instill f ear, to ins till anxiety, to throw out falsehoods and assumptions and speculation to get people riled up. That’s what it’s all about. It’s not about what we’re going to do or what we’re contemplating or what w e might contemplate relative to the heritage savings trust fund.

But I can say once again that the fund as it now sits will stay the way it is today. Dr. Nicol: To the Prem ier: so the re’s no basis to the Minis ter of Revenue’s comments this m orning when he said that in th e next year’s budget, 2004-05, y ou will be looking at the possibilit y of using the heritage fund to pay down the debt? Mr. Klein: I don’t know what the hon. member said. You know, he can say that anything is possible because nothing is carved in stone. Nothing is certa in. But I ca n tell y ou that as of tod ay, this v ery moment, nothing is contemplated relative to the f und.

But with respect to what t he minis ter said or did not say , why not ask the minister? I’ll have him respond. Mr. Melchin : Thank you, Mr. Speak er. Albe rtans va lue – and we’ve always known this – the Alberta heritage savings trust fund, and I do too. This question was to allow Albertans to provide some feedback about how the y view it could best serve us in the future. It was always about: how can this fund best serve Albertans today and forever? So in that respect the endowment portion is and has been our policy and will continue to frame the primary policy of this government.

Now, there was one q uestion related to the debt repayment. As was mentioned, 51 percent of Albertans did say t hat they would support using t he fund. W e released the re sults today. But it is important to ask Albertans, and we’re please d to b e able to g et a response from those types of consultations. It is not in our budget contemplation this year, but we clearly will come back and revisit making sure this fund is structured properly for even those kinds of questions but at a future date. It w as just part of the c onsultation we’ve been involved with. The Speaker: The hon. leader. Dr. Nicol: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. To the Minister of Revenue: you just said “the endowment portion” of the heritage fund. Since when has this fund been divided up into a series of things. It is all an endowment in the minds of Albertans. Why are you changing it by making comments like that? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Melchin : Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er. T his fun d has served Albertans very well for a variety of reasons over its 26-year history. It was originally created as a multipurpose fund for many of its years of history. In the last number of years our priority has been to repay the debt.

We have used the income to help support programs of the government, over $25 billi on of income over the life of that fund. That income has helped benefit health and education, repayment of debt. It benefits Albertans continually. In that respect, it was very important to us to help clarify even the misconstrued comments at times – is it a rainy day fund? – or, otherwise, to get a clearer focus. Yes, it is an endowment fund, and I support that. Dr.

Nicol: To the Minis ter of Re venue: i f you wanted to clarify Albertans’ perspective on what that fund s hould be used f or, why didn’t you do a s cientifically based cons ultation wi th Albert ans rather than a voluntary response as a form of consultation? Mr. Melchin: Mr. Speaker, we are pleased with the opportunity to consult with Alb ertans and ask Albertans. This survey was not a survey in the sen se of only limiti ng it to a few randomly selected people to participate. It was designed to allow all Albertans to have a voice on it . Over 77 ,000 people res ponded to it, a t remendous response from Albertans.

March 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 475 Dr. Nicol: Again to the Minister of Finance. The process doesn’t give any statistical significance to that kind of a survey. How can you judge policy changes on a survey that has no scientific statistical analysis basis? The Speaker: I take it that question was to the Minister of Revenue. Dr. Nicol: The Minister of Revenue, yes. Mr. Melchin : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today, as I mentioned earlier, was the relea se of the survey.

There were no policy an- nouncements, no changes contemplated in this budget, but it is part of the consultation to which we are listening, and we will follow up on it. Dr. Nicol: To the Minister of Re venue: since there’s no scientific basis for that survey, why don’t you just throw it out? Mr. Melchin : Over 77,000 people fe lt it impor tant enough to respond. That’s a very high respons e and eve n statistically valid with respect to a representative sa mple.

When you break it do wn geographically among all the regions of Alberta, results were similar, and it does have a high confidence level, even to that of exceeding a poll. The Speaker: Third Official Opposition main question. The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Natural Gas Rebates Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This government threw millions of dollars around in energy rebates during the last election to hide the true cost of energy deregulation from A lbertans before they vote d.

Aft er the ele ction this g overnment promise d in the throne speech that it would tap its substantial energy riches to shield consumers whenever natural gas prices g et abnormally high. My first question is to the Premier. Given that after the last election the Premier stated tha t if we are facing somethi ng like $9 or $10 per gigajoule, that is abnormally high, why is your government so mean now when the average m onthly price that Alber tans a re paying is over $9? Why was that true then and is not true now? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speaker, what we have here is the re-re-rebate.

You know, I’ve answered the question so many times in this Legislature. What we said at the time – and there was no program in place other than an ad hoc prog ram to s hield consum ers. By the way , the Liberals never talk about that. They never talk about that in positive terms and the benefit to Albertans at that particular time, that along with the electricity rebates. They never mention also that they were part of the debate that led to the legislation and never opposed the legislation that we nt into place , setting up a program to provide certainty relative to rebates. They never ever say that.

They never ever say that they were part of t he debat e and did not oppose the legislation. What they are doing now is pure, unadulterated, down- low politics. Nothing more; nothing less. They were there for the debate. 1:50 Dr. Nicol: Where were the regulations? Mr. Klein: Mr. Speak er, they talk about the regulations. At that particular time – and I’d like to go back to Hansard – I don’t recall any of them getting up and saying: where are the regulations; how is this going to work? [interjections] Oh, now they complain. Now they complain because it’s politically expedient; the temperatures are cold.

It’s politic ally e xpedient f or th em t o do it. Whe n the temperature warms up, then they will cool on this particular issue, and they’ll go on to something else, whatever is politically expedient at that particular time, whatever is negative. Whatever they can tell Albertans about what is wrong with this province, they will capture the moment and go out and spread their negativity. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again to the Premier: given that the Premier stated in April 2001 that $9 to $10 a gigajoule for natural gas was ab normally high, what has made your govern- ment change its m ind and ma de you bre ak your promise? Is the orange and blue sweater going to be your legacy to this province? Mr. Klein: The orange and blue sweater, Mr. Speaker? Orange and blue are great colours.

I’m just reading here the natural gas prices 2000 to present: from April $3.10, May $3.35, June $4.33, Jul y $4.42, A ugust $3. 93, September $4.66, October $5.53, November $5.79, December $8.28, January $11.21, February $8.05, and Marc h $6.48, Mr. Sp eaker. Then it started to co me down. We had a program in place at that particular time which was ad hoc because we didn’t have the room to introduce legislation. As a matter of fa ct, the Liberals were out there saying: what this government needs is legislation to bring in a sustainable long-term program. We did it. We brought it in. They debated it.

They didn’t oppose it at all, and now they’re complaining about it. But the facts clearly show that when the rebate program was introdu ced, gas had reac hed an all-t ime high, and it has not reached that level since. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again to the Premier: given that in April 2001 you said that if natural gas was between $9 and $10 a gigajoule – and that was an ad mittance that it was an abnormally high price – you would provide rebates, where are those rebates in the emergency that m any Albertans are now fa cing? Where’s the money? Mr. Klein: Mr.

Speaker, right now we go to two thousand and . . . Mr. MacDonald: Broken promise. Mr. Klein: Do you want to hear the information? The Speaker: I do, and that’s why I recognized the responder. Mr. Klein: Well, they don’t want to hear the information, obviously, because these are the facts. Reference price natural gas 2001-2002: April $6.59, May $5.74, June $4.44, July $3.75, August $3.53, Se ptember $2.76, October $2.40, November $3.33, December $3.20.

We’re into ’02: January $3.17, February $2.71, March $3.23, April $3.91, May $3.91, June $3.54, July $3.17, August $2.93, September $3.51, October $4.27, November $4.85, December $4.94. January no figures, no figures, and no figures up to March, Mr. Speaker. Clearly, if you take those averages, if you take the 12 – how thick are they to realize that there are four seasons usually in this province ? There is winter, spring, summer, and fall. They only allude to summer.

476 Alberta Hansard March 13, 2003 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Health Care Workers’ Collective Bargaining Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Spea ker. T his week at the request of health employers the government moved to deny interna- tionally recognized employment rights to healt h care workers and chose to shuffle them around without any promise that their service or seniority would be protected. The government did the bidding of the employers in this case but completely blindsided the employees.

We have a minister of human resources who sides with business over injured workers, the WCB over firefighters, and now regional health authorities over nurse s and other he alth c are wor kers. To the minister: why has the minister bent over backwards to let employers write their own ticket yet failed completely to consult with thousands of workers or their unions in matters of direct concern to them? Mr. Dunford: Mr. Speaker, I might rem ind the hon. member that with the bill that was introduced the other day, we’re really talking about a platform for collective bargaining going forward.

Un ions will be in place. There will be collective agreements that will be in place. It’s just that we’ve enabled a much more streamlined position in terms of nine employ ers trying t o deal wi th perhaps ov er 400 collective agreements, that this ultimately and finally would be 36 in number. I might add to the comments on his

preamble t hat the particular concerns he was expressing are no t really labour code activities. They’re more in line with the collective bargaining that would go on between two parties, and of course that will continue to go on. That hasn’t been touched. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, given that this minister seems to value the input of employ ers more than that of employees, since he didn’t consult with them at all, how does he define the concept of balance in labour relations? Mr. Dunford: Mr.

Speaker, I’ve had the opportunity a number of times to speak publicly regarding this particular issue, and I think that the message is coming through to Albertans, at least I hope it is, that this was all about the delivery of health care. There’s reform that’s taking place here in Alberta that we believe will lead to better access to health care, lead to better delivery of the health care once a patient is in the system. So we have focused entirely on that, and I think that t here’s a greate r good here th at has bee n met a nd hopefully will be achieved.

As far as balance, we sti ll have an i ncredibly good Labour Relations Code in this province, and we are providing a structure for health care bargaining similar to having had to provide a structure in the past for construction bargaining, for an example. So I think that in this particular case the government has upheld its responsibility, and we look forward to the two parties moving forward, then, from this point on in a more streamlined and hopefully a more beneficial manner. The Speaker: The hon. member. Mr. Mason: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker.

Well, why is it that this government uses a heavy hand – and those are the mini ster’s own words – a gainst its empl oyees but a wet noodle against employers; for ex ample, the Edmonton Economic Development Authority, which repeatedly violated Alberta labour laws? Mr. Dunford: I guess we managed to connect some dots there. What we, of course, do on a daily basis, Mr. Speaker, is deal with the issues that are in front of us. Again I want to repeat that this was an activity that the whole motivation for has been in the interests of the delivery of health care.

That was the reason for it then, it’s the reason for it today, and it’ll be the reason for it tomorrow. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Glenora, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods. Heritage Savings Trust Fund (continued) Mr. Hutton: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As chairman of the Albert a Heri tage Savings Trust Fund Committee I rea d wi th interest the survey results that the Minister of Revenue released this morning. They show that Albertans value the fund and are not keen to spend it. I ha ve one ques tion to th e Minister of Revenue.

To assist the all-party comm ittee that I chair, t o help us w ith our deliberations in our meetings, what are some of the options that are being considered? The Speaker: The hon. minister. 2:00 Mr. Melchin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to first say, with respect to the survey, that the heritage fund has always been known and valued, that it is an icon for Albertans. They do value it. In our approach to it all of the questions of the survey were

preambled by: its uses ought to be allowed to be replenished and grow over time. That was the preface, that was the background to the survey. In that respect, with the options being reviewed, do we review things like the endowment fund? What does that mean, an endowment fund, and how is that properly structured so that it is cl ear to A lbertans what that means and you can be clear on that? So that’s paramount. That is the most supported idea, and we will bring that clarity back in further discussion. But this is a fund here to stay. The Spea ker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Mill Woods, followed by the hon.

Member for Calgary-Bow. Student Loan Program Dr. Massey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Cuts and chronic underfund- ing charact erize po stsecondary s chool financ e in Albe rta. The students in the gallery today will be under constant pressure to pay higher tu ition, hi gher fe es, and m ore for c ampus s ervices. My questions are to the Minister of Learning. How will students at the University of Calg ary ne xt ye ar pay for housing when a one - bedroom cam pus apartment costs $726 and the student loan allowance is $315? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I cannot comment specifically on what the rental rates are in Calgary, but what I will say is that the student loan limit for students this year will be around $10,200 to $10,400 per year. That means that on a four-year degree they will be able to get ar ound $42,000. The interesting

part is that they will have to pay back 20,000 of those dollars. The other roughly $22,000 will be picked up by the provincial government. The other thing, Mr. Speaker, which is really important, as well, is that in the upcoming year we anticipate that there will be 46,400 students who will receive student loans, for a value of $417 million in the province of Alberta.

March 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 477 The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Massey: Thank you. Aga in t o the same ministe r: does the government see any relationship between rising student costs and the 1,500 people being fed at the U of A’s food bank each year? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, one of the things that I have looked at a lot since becoming minister has been the student loan program, and over that time we have increased the student loan program by about 45 to 50 percent. It’s something that I feel very strongly about.

We have also i ncreased quite dram atically the student a wards, such as the Jason Lang scholarships, numerous other scholarships. Jason Lang scholarships, by the way, are to the tune of around $5 million or $6 million a yea r, are regardless of f inancial ne ed, are the re for performance. We have a seen a tremendous amount of dollars being put into that. The Ru therford scholars hips, for e xample, are something else that this government does. I believe, off the top of my head, that they’re around $35 million or $40 million a year. So there is a huge amount of dollars that are going in.

Students, for example, now pay in tuition an average of about 25 percent of the cost of their actual education. Seventy-five percent is being borne by the government an d other s ources. S o we’re seeing a h uge amount of dollars go into postsecondary education. In saying that, Mr. Speaker, I will say that it’s money extremely well spent. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Massey: Thank you. Again to the same minister: what adjust- ment will the government make in the loans program to help students deal with skyrocketing utility costs? Dr. Oberg: Mr.

Speaker, one of the things that we tend to work on in the student loan program is the overall loan limit , and each and every year we look at the overall loan limit and how we can increase it. This year in the upcoming budget you will see what is going to happen. I think people will be reasonably happy. But, again, what I will say – and I really must reiterate this – is that Alberta has by far the best student loan program in Canada. Talk to any of the student groups; they w ill agree with tha t. It’s something that we’re very proud of: $417 million goes out each year. The Speaker: The hon.

Member for Calgary-Bow, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Utility Costs for Low-income Albertans Ms DeLong: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the hon. Minister of Human Resources and Employment. Mr. Minister, I’ve continued to hear from constituents who are still worried that they won’t be a ble to pay their utility bills, so I’d like some further clarification on this. Wha t is your department doing to help low- income Albertans who don’t have the money to pay their bills? Mr. Dunford: Actually, Mr.

Speaker, we will help Albertans who do not have the resources to pay these utility bills. We hav e an emergency assistance program, that we’ve used now for a number of seasons, under our supports for indepe ndence pro gram, but in answering the hon. member, it’s very, very important that Albertans understand that in order to be able t o access this particular assis- tance, there is a screening process that they’re going to have to go through. First of all, they will have had to have received a discon- nect notice.

T hrough examination and through rev ealing of their particular situation, they will have to show clearly that they have no other choice, that they have no other method of being able to pay and, I guess, more importantly, as well that they can show they are not eligible for any other types of assistance. So if you or an y member here in the House have constituents that are in that situation, they must apply in person to a Human Resources and Employment office, and then we’ll try to help as best we can. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms DeLong: Thank you.

How much money will your department provide to people w ho have no othe r way of pay ing their ut ility bills? Mr. Dunford: Well, of course, we don’t have just a sum that’s given to everyone. We would want to examine each of the situations on a case-by-case basis, but we have a policy in place that there could be up to a thousand dollars for a circumstance, that could be provided for utility arrears or reconnection or perhaps even if there are some deposit fees that would come into place.

Now, technically , under our policy there might be an opportunity for a person, you know, in really dire situa tions to perha ps use thi s more than once, but that would be a very exceptional situation, I’m afraid. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms D eLong: Thank you. Mr. Ministe r, you hav en’t mentioned people on AISH. Does this include people who are on AISH? Mr. Dunford: Well, it can. While AISH is a stand-alone program, we can move people off AISH on a temporary basis into our supports for independence program and perhaps, then, look after them that way.

But in specific answer to your question, AISH in and of itself does not have thi s type of assistance available, so they ’d have to move onto our SFI program. Physiotherapy Programs Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, every Thursday the Alberta Liberals will ask a question that members of the public have asked us to pose. Members of the pu blic can send us their questions by phoning our office or visiting our web s ite at www.altaliberals.ab.ca.

Today’s question comes from an Albertan very concerned regarding funding and operation of physiotherapy programs in Alberta, so my questions are to the Minister of Health and Wellness. Given that the Expert Advisory Panel to Rev iew Publicly Fu nded Health Services has already report ed to the minister, when can Albertans expect an answer as to what is going to happen wit h public funding for physiotherapy? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, my expectation is that government will have a response to the report t abled by the expert panel, he aded by Dr.

Bob Westbury, sometime in the next three or four weeks, and the public will certain ly be made aware of the resp onse that we have once government has had the opportunity to revie w, d igest, and make decisions on those recommendations. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Taft: Thank you. Given that there are no requireme nts that community rehabilitation funding provided to RHAs actually goes to community rehabilitation programs, how does the minister ensure that Albertans get the physiotherapy service they need?

478 Alberta Hansard March 13, 2003 2:10 Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, we do rely upon regional health authorities to establish priorities for the delivery of health services within their particular regions, s o we w ould expect that if phy siotherapy i s a needed area wi thin a regional health authority’s boundaries, that need would be m ade known to the pe ople w ho run our sy stem in those areas. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Taft: Thank you.

Given that the current community rehabilita- tion program is widel y regarded in t he professi on as comple x, confusing, and perce ived by many as being unfair, w hat is the minister going to do to fix the system? Mr. Mar: Mr. Speaker, we have asked this expert panel to provide for us their best advice on how to resolve some of these issues as to how we get effec tive – co st-effective and phys ically e ffective – treatment to individuals who require it.

It is a complex area, but they have been charged with the responsibility of trying to sort through some of these complexities and l ook at ev idence-based decision- making for the purposes of making policy. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Calgary-Lougheed, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Ellerslie. Calgary Consolidated Courthouse Ms Graham: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

As someone who has advocated for a consolidated courthouse in Calgary since my election some six years ago, I was very pleased to see that govern- ment had initiate d a process last sum mer tha t wou ld see a new Calgary courtho use bu ilt. Since then, I understand that three developers have been chosen to submit detailed proposals pursuant to an RFP, or a re quest for proposal. My question, then, this afternoon is to the Minister of Infrastructure. When will a developer be chosen to start construction of the much-needed courthouse? The Speaker: The hon. minister. Mr. Lund: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is, indeed, a very exciting and large pr oject tha t we are undert aking in the city of Calgary. We’re probably going to be building a building with some 1.1 million square feet, so it is a very large project. I would like to just quickly run through the process that we’ve been using, because it is extremely important to us that this be very open and transparent, and we wanted to make sure, because of the size of the project, that we didn’t leave anyone out that had the expertise or financial ability to participate in the project.

So we first called for a request for expression of interest and had some 27 respondents to that request. Because of this great interest, we then d ecided that it was extremely important that we get some outside expertise to help us with it, so we called for an RFP to bring on consultants that had e xpertise in courthouses , in financ ing, in architecture, and those ty pes of thing s. We t hen moved on to a request for qualifications, and out of that process we had so me 10 people and firms respond.

We then short-listed those and came out with six firms that were interviewed, and out of that, there were three that qualified to move forward to the n ext level, which will be the request for proposal. As we speak, the request for proposal is being printed. It will be made ava ilable to the three com panies on Monday. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Graham: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Given that this process is under way and that a de veloper will presumably come out of this process, when will the courthouse be built? Can the minister advise? Mr. Lund: Mr.

Speaker, we are actually on a fairly fast track with this whole project. We hope to have the contract signed to go ahead with construction in October with completion in the summer of 2006 and the ability to move in and start operating from that consolidated courthouse. The Speaker: The hon. member. Ms Graham: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My last question is t o the Minister of Justic e. Given the obvious benefit to the court- going public in being abl e to attend one location instead of seven, I ’m wondering if the minister can advise of other anticipated benefits to this new facility for the public. Mr.

Hancock: Well, Mr. Speaker, we would anticipate huge benefits to having a consolidated justice facility in the city of Calgary where all citizens of Calgary would know where they could go to a ccess courts. Right now, as the mem ber has indicated, there are seven different loc ations. There’s prisoner ha ndling in at l east two of those; I think probably three or four of those where there are prisoner handling facilities. There are law libraries. There is a great amount of d uplication of resources being util ized now, which can all b e consolidated in one facility.

So from an administrative point of view it makes a lot more sense and will save us some money, which can then be redeployed into the system to more effectively serve justice in that area. From an access to justice perspective there are huge benef its to people knowing where they need to go to the court tha t they’re supposed to be in, and tha t’s very pr oblematic right now with confusion.

There’ s an opportunity in buildi ng a facility of t his nature to bring tog ether ass ociated j ustice activities: family law clinics, mediation processes, and other processes which people need to access in addition t o the cou rts. So there are a great number of activities which can be consolidated in that area, both redeploying resources and making the access to justice more effective. Milk River Basin Water Management Ms Carlson: Mr. Speaker, 20 years ago this province tried to build a dam on the Milk River.

That plan was scrapped because the dam would endanger an internationally significant grassland that serves as the habitat for several rare and threatened species. But now this government is quietly trying to bring that plan back. To the Minister of Environment: what has changed in the last 20 years to lessen the environmental risk of putting a dam on the Milk River? Dr. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, we’re moving forward with the study at the req uest of the co mmunity. The stud y is not just looking at a dam; it is looki ng at options for water storage.

Even in th e driest year, about two years ago, we passed on between 55 and 57 percent of the water in the South Saskatchewan basin to Saskatchewan. We have to continue to provide 50 percent. Even in the driest year there was 7 percent of the wat er that f lowed, so as we go forw ard in looking at water manag ement i ssues, al l the wa ter ma nagement issues in all of the province need to be looked at. As we move forward in particular to the Milk River basin system, the Milk River would be dry if it we ren’t for a number of options

March 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 479 and actions that have been taken in the past. This is a project of the community, the Am erican g overnment – the Milk River f lows ultimately down to the Gulf of Mexico – and it is also a study that’s been undertaken by us. As I say, it’s just a study; there ar e no commitments. The study looks at onstream and off-stream storage plus environmental effects plus economic matters. Ms Carlso n: Mr. Speak er, why is the minis ter cond ucting a prefeasibility stud y without a river basin managem ent plan, as required under the Water Act? Dr. Taylor: Well, Mr.

Speaker, we are going forward with a study, and certainly we are working with all the basins right now in terms of getting water management plans developed. We’ve done a good one on the Bow River, we’re working on the South Saskatchewan, and we’re working with one on the Milk River as well. There would be nothing built either onstream or off-stream until there was a water management plan. Ms Carlson: Mr. Speaker, will the E nvironment minister tell this House how much this project will benefit Americans and how much it will cost Albertans? Dr. Taylor: Well, Mr.

Speak er, of c ourse we ’re continuing to monitor the situation as it goes forward, but I can’t tell her that until the study is complete, and if there’s any benefit to the Americans, we would be expecting the America ns to pay their fair share. I ha d a meeting in Milk Riv er some time a go with A merican community officials and so on. The Americans are interested in knowing what the costs will be, and of course they recognize that they need to pay their fair share of any project if – if – a project were to go forward. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona, followed by the hon.

Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose. Education Funding Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have never seen education stakeholders more united against this government’s wrong-headed policies, which have created a serious funding crisis in our schools. School trustees, educators, parents, and students are speaking with one voice, saying that this Tory government is just not listening to their concerns. To the Minister of Learning. I hope he’s listening. Can the minister please explain how he has managed the rare feat of uniting all education stakeholders against his government’s policies. 2:20 Dr. Oberg: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I think the hon. member is halluci- nating again. I believe that the school boards are doing a very good job of managing their funds. I also bel ieve that there’s been huge amounts of dollars that have been put into education and the learning system. We put more money into the system per c apita than a ny other province in Canada. O ur students do absolutely the best on any examination across Canada; indeed, any worldwide examination. Lastly, our teachers are paid approximately 10 percent more than any other teachers in the countr y.

So I w ould really caution this hon . member about talking about a crisis in education. It is trumped up, and I think it does a disrespect to those teachers that are doing a very hard job and doing very hard work. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. That ’s a very hallucinated answer to my very clear question. My next question to the minister: why won’t the minister swallow his pride and admit that the government is wrong to not fully fund the arbitration settlement and grade 10 credits and that this refusal is exacting an unacceptable toll on Alberta classrooms? Dr. Oberg: Well, Mr.

Speaker, first of all, the arbitration settlement was fully funded. It was funded to the tune of $298 mi llion for a $260 million settlement. The second point that I wanted to make is on CEUs. Do you realize that in the Edmonton public school board we had to fine schools because they were putting forward the wrong CEUs? They were using the C EUs to put dolla rs into their own coffers. In some school boards the CEUs in grade 10 were up to 47 per year. We had students that were receiving over 80 – 80 – credits. Do the math timewise. There aren’t that many hours in the week. This was a huge problem.

We have addressed the problem and are coming forward with the solution starting this September. The Speaker: The hon. member. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For the minister to say today that the settlement was fully funded really shows how hallucinated he is. Will the minister tell parents and students that he has gotten the message and announce today that next year’s education budget will contain sufficient funds so the school boards are not forced to lay off teachers and cut vital programs? Dr. Oberg: Mr. Speaker, I will elucidate that hallucinating question. There will be money in the upcom ing budget.

You will however have to wait till the upcoming budget. A lot of the school boards are working extremely hard to balance their budgets. They’re attempting to keep the number of teachers that will be laid off by attrition to a minimum, and we will see how they do it. I listen to people all the time. As a matter of fact, last night I met with the parent council at Eastglen, which I be lieve is in the hon. Me mber for Edmonton- Highlands’ constituency, and I didn’t see him there. The Speaker: Boy, there’s a lot of activity back and forth.

To my hon. colleag ues the Mem ber for Edm onton-Highlands and t he Member for Edm onton-Strathcona, just bu tton it a bi t; o kay? Because if you don’t, I’m moving your desks over here. The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose, followed by the hon. Member for Edmonton-Glengarry. Labour Supply Mr. Johns on: Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er. Rece nt repor ts have predicted that Alberta is going to have high employment growth over the next few years. Reports state that over the next five years there will be a strong demand for occupations that need university degrees, especially in nursing, bus iness, and e ngineering.

Howev er, with many baby boomers retiring over the next 1 0 years, there is a real concern in my con stituency that t here will be large-scale worker shortages, especially in the area of health, where it has already been predicted that there is going to be a shortage of medical doctors and nurses. My first question is to the Minister of Human Resources and Employment. Does the minister and his department have any long- range plans to ensure that there won’t be labour shortages in Alberta over the next decade? Mr. Dunford: Yes, Mr. Speaker, to the question.

In terms of plans they would be both immediate and, of course, long term and involve the federal government through the Human Resources Development branch of the federal government, but also we have cross-ministry initiatives here within the province of Alberta. I might just direct the

480 Alberta Hansard March 13, 2003 member’s attention to a recent report that has been released by the Department of Learning and ourselves called Prepared for Growth. In that report we articulate a three-pronged approach to ensuring a strong labour market. First of all, of course you want to deal with Albertans and make sure that there are strong training pr ograms available for A lberta workers.

Secondly, then, of course you want to increase the ability of workers from across this country to be able to come t o Alberta and to work, and with that, then, of course we want to have in place good accreditation systems. Then, finally, just around the w orld: being able to at tract sk illed i mmigrants through, of course, the Alberta advantage.

So our portion of this in Human Resources and Employment is to provide inform ation, to provi de advice , and t o provide financial support to help people get jobs, get training, and choose careers, then, with bright futures, for which, of course, doctors and nurs es would qualify. Mr. Johnson: My first supplemental is to the Minister of Health and Wellness. What plans does the minister have to ensure tha t there will not be a shortage of medical doctors and nurses in the next ten years? Mr. Mar: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I can as sure the hon. m ember and members of this House and Albertans that our department is clearly aware of many reports that have talked about a general shortage of health professionals across Canada. Interestingly – and I think it’s worth pointing out – this is one of the areas that was not specifically addressed by the federal government in its recent budget, nor was it really refer red to except pa renthetically in the Romanow report, although it was identified in both the Mazankowski report and the report done by Senator Kirby. Mr.

Speaker, we have done a good job of trying to deal with this particular issue, and it’s a tw o-pronged appr oach. Firs t of all , through primary health care reform we need to make s ure that we make better use of the health professionals that we currently have in expanding the scopes of pract ice and the utilization of competent professionals in various areas of health care. So that’s the first prong to the approach. The second prong, Mr. Speaker, is with respect to the training of professionals and their recruitment and retention. Now, that is also a two-pronged approach.

One is that in the short term we can recruit people from other places, and we’ve been successful in doing that partly because of our labour negotiation contracts with nurses, with physicians that have resulted in almost 650 new positions coming to Alberta in the last thr ee years, some 1,500 new nurses in the last couple of years that we’ve been successful in recruiting. Also, Mr.

Speaker, we are interested in training more people, the theory being tha t people who are born, raised, and live he re in Alberta and train in Alberta will tend to stay in Alberta, and so in that respect – and this is my f inal point – w e have f ocused on postsecondary education seats f or heal th care. I’m pleased to say that over the last four years we have added an additional 2,116 new spaces. Alberta now has a total of more than 12,000 postsecondary education seats devoted to the education of health care professionals. Mr. Johnson: My final ques tion is t o the Min ister of Learni ng.

What steps h as the Minis ter of L earning taken to ensur e Alberta students are being encouraged to enter studies at the postsecondary level, that are predicted to b e in high demand over the next ten years? The Speaker: Okay. Thirty seconds, hon. minister. Dr. Oberg: Well, Mr. Speaker, it’s very, very hard to talk about our excellent postsecondary education system . . . The Speaker: Can we come back with a ministerial statement, then, on Monday? Untendered Contracts Mr. Bonner: Mr.

Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Infrastructure said that he w ouldn’t waste taxpa yer doll ars to m ake public the records of untendered contracts issued by his department. When I revealed to him tha t members of his own department calculated it would cost less than $6,000, he said the amount was so small that the opposition should pay for it. The minister cannot have it both ways. To the Minister of Infrastructure: which is it? It costs too much to find the records, or they’re so cheap that the opposition should pay for them? 2:30 Mr. Lund: Mr.

Speaker, I think it’s deplorable than an hon. member – I don’t know why I use t he word “honourable” – would stand in his place and say that I said something that I didn’t sa y yesterday. I did not say that since it was so cheap they should pay for it. I never said that, and I think that the hon. member should actually apologize for making those kinds of accusations. I never said that. Mr. Bonner: To the same minister, Mr. Speaker: do you deny that there is public benefit to making these records public? Mr. Lund: Mr.

Speaker, I told the hon. member the other day to get his act together and then we would answer his questions, but until he gets his act together, he can go the other route that he started. Mr. Bonner: Mr. Speaker, given that the minister still doesn’t have an answer, is he saying that the public should not be able to see these documents? What is the mini ster hidi ng that h e doesn’t w ant Albertans to see? Mr. Lund: Mr. Speaker, we are hiding absolutely nothing. If the hon. member wants the public t o pay for a fishin g trip, I disagree with it.

If he wants to narrow it down so that he defines what exactly it is that he wants, then w e will deal with it, but I cannot, when somebody says that they want every contract that we’ve entered into over the last t wo years, have staff spend hun dreds of hour s going through and finding it. We will not do it. Speaker’s Ruling Items Previously Decided by the Assembly The Speaker: Just a second. The chair is going to make a comment on what’s just transpired here. This is the second day in a row now that this has transpired with this question.

It would’ve been helpful if perh aps so me learned par liamentarians in the A ssembly might have interjected, but the chair will. We have on our agenda and we have in our Routine items called Motions for Returns and Written Questions. Hon. members can pose certain questions. They have them identified. They’re printed in the Order Paper. They’re published. We arrive here on a certain day, and an hon. member moves a question. It is not for the minister to reject or accept the question; it is for the Assembly to accept or reject the question.

If it were to come about that a question is bein g presented by someone and the hon. minister says, “Yes, I’m prepared to provide it” but the Assembly votes no, the minister canno t. It’s the Assembly that rules.

March 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 481 In the series of questions that were raised the other day, I think following out of the question asked yesterday and the question asked today, the Assembly voted no to the provision of the statement. So for absolute c larity from a jurisdict ional point of view and a constitutional point of view let us remember that it is the Assembly that rules, not a minister that rules. Might we revert briefly to Introduction of Guests? [Unanimous consent granted] head : Introduction of G uests (reversion) Mr. Ouellette: Mr.

Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise and introduce to you and to all members of this Assembly a very good friend of mine from Pine Lake, Doug Sawyer. Doug is a rancher at Pine Lake and a very good supporter of this government and a very good citizen of the Pine Lake area. He’s a lso th e president of the Clean Lake Society. He’s a big-time hunter and a big-time fisher- man, and I get to eat a l ittle wild meat and some fish when I sto p over by his house. I’m glad to see him come to take

part in watching our Legislature today. head : Members’ Statements The Speaker: The hon. Member for Wetaskiwin-Camrose. The Ross Family of Camrose Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. The Ross family in my constituency has done phenomenal work in raising awareness for the organ donation program. Mike, Tim, Kate, Jen, Rod, and Sheilagh have had a personal experience with the program. In 1992 Jenny, at the age of four, underwent a liver transplant to save her life from a virus. Jen l ay sic k for two we eks b efore an a nonymous dono r provided the gift of life for her.

She made an excellent recovery, and she and her family have been large supporters of the donor program ever since. Last summer Mike and Ti m roller-skied from Edmonton to the Canadian Transplant Games, in St. J ohn’s, Newfoundland, in th e Thanks 100 Times Over campaign. The campaign raised awareness of the organ donation program and also served to thank families of donors of org ans and tissues . Mike and Tim roller-skied 6,000 kilometres in 69 days, visiting over 30 cities in nine provinces. In November 2002 Jen was asked t o represe nt the Stoller y children’s hospital as this year’s champion child.

She is an ambassa- dor for the 80,000 children treated at Stol lery each year. J en ha s been asked to address the Senate of Canada next week on behalf of the children and families of the organ donor program. Sheilagh Ross was appointed to the Canadian Council on Organ Donation and Transplantation in 2001 as one of the two Albertan s sitting on the national council. Sheilagh is the lead for their public awareness initiative and sits on the donation committee. The entire family continues to pr omote the benefit of the organ donation program, which is life.

I encourage all Albertans to visit their web sit e at ww w.thanks100times.ca to lea rn more a bout the family’s efforts. I als o encourage all Albertans to fi ll out a donor card so that they, too, can give the gift of life. From this Assembly I’m pleased to say thank you to the Rosses and welcome them here today. Asbestos Exposure Dr. Taft: Mr. Speaker, I hold in my hand excerpts from this govern- ment’s own Occupational Health & Safety Magazine. These four simple pages d ocument in jus t over one year the deaths of 32 workers in Al berta, workers who died because of asbestos.

T hey were insulators, plumbers, carpenters, and electricians. They were mechanics, painters, store clerks, and engineers. These workers who died because of asbestos are only the ones we know about . How many more Albertans are out there dying from asbestos exposure? Our knowledge of asbestos has come a long way. At one time it was known as a miracle mineral used in a variety of substances like building materials, fire retardants, and insulation. We didn’t know that asbestos fibres become embedded in the lungs and can lead to several fatal diseases, but now we do.

Asbestos is the largest single occupational cause of death and disease. In Great Britain asbestos kills more people each year than are killed on roads. By 2020 it is estimated that a staggeri ng 1 0,000 people a y ear wi ll die fr om asbestos exposure in the U.K. alone. In the past few m onths se rious concerns r egarding asbestos exposure at two he alth facilities in Calg ary have been br ought to light.

The safety of workers and patients was put at risk at both the Foothills and H oly Cross, and despit e the ser iousness of asbestos exposure, repeated breaches of the government’s asbestos abatement policy continued to occur. Where is the government on this issue? A good abatement policy means nothing if there is no will to enforce it. Improper asbestos removal at the Foothills and Holy Cross are two examples that we know about. How many times each day does improper asbestos removal in Alberta put worker and public safety at risk? There is no excuse. We know the dangers of asbestos.

It is time for the government to show leadership and take action on this issue by properly enforcing the legislation. The Speaker: The hon. Mem ber for Spr uce Grov e-Sturgeon-St. Albert. Farm Safety Week Mr. Horner: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to recognize and bring attention to the Farm Safety Week campaign, which began on March 12 and will be concluding on March 19. Statistics, Mr. Spea ker, show that far ming is one of the more dangerous occupations in Alberta.

Unfort unately, statistics don’t show the real impact farming-related deaths and injuries have on the families who have had a mem ber seriou sly injur ed or kille d. Millions of dollars in production and thous ands of work hours are lost, but how do you measure the emotional loss of a fam ily member? On average there are about 120 people killed and another 1,700 seriously injured each year in farm -related incidents across Canada, and one-fifth of those deaths occur in Alberta. In 2002 Alberta lost 24 members of its farming community, and of the people lost five were children.

The focus of this year’s campaign is on children’s safety because even one is too many. Parents can ensure the safety of their children through proper supervision and training for any task their children might be involved with. Children need to be assigned tasks that they are capable of doing safely. Farm-related tragedies are preventable. One of the most horrific facts that surrounds the death or serious injury of a chi ld on a fa rm is that in the m ajority of incid ents t he parents of the child witness the incident.

Climbing hay bales may look innocent, but when children climb and play on top of them, they may become unstable and fall onto the child. Tractors are another dangerous piece of equipment that children should avoid. One of the most common causes of serious injury or death for children is when they fall off a moving tractor. Although hazards exist on farms, they are a wonderful place for children to be raised. Children just need to be aware of the dangers that exist.

482 Alberta Hansard March 13, 2003 2:40 Almost every farmer in Alberta could tell a story about an injury they sustained or a near miss that occurred throughout their daily farming tasks, and it is important that these stories and the recom- mendations arising from them are shared, especially during this farm safety campaign. Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development takes an activ e role in prov iding fa rmers with in formation that promotes farm safety year-round. Farmers are encouraged this week to share their knowledge and expertise and raise the awareness of potentially hazardous practices.

The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Electoral Boundaries Mr. Ma cDonald: Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er. Las t Septem ber a disappointing interim report was delivered by the Electoral Bound- aries Commission recommending that the city of Edmonton lose a seat, that rura l Alberta lo se a seat, and that the ri ding of Fort McMurray be consolida ted with t he surrounding constituency to create a riding whose population was 20 percent over the provincial average. The city of Edmonton is one of the two largest economic centres in Alberta.

It serves as the capital for our fine province and over the past two years has seen substantial economic growth and increases in population. Yet even though our current population qualifies the city to keep 19 seats, Edmonton is being punished with the loss of one of them. This will leave our city underrepresented and with less influence and say in this House. After the interim report of the Electoral Boundaries Commission was released, there was an outcry from the citizens, city council, and the opposition parties of this House. Mr.

Speaker, we need represen- tation in this city to watch out for the interests of all Edmontonians. This report takes that representation away. We need representation to protect our municipally owned utilities. We need representation to protect our public schools. We need representation to protect our public health care system. We need representation to pr otect an d further our roads and our infrastructure. We need representation to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves: the disabled, those on low-income assistance programs, seniors, and children.

If we lose that seat, the people of Edmonton will lose representation. They will have their democratic rights compromised. They will suffer the consequences of having one less voice at the legislative table. I would now urge all hon. members, especially the majority of the Edmonton Progressive Conservative caucus, who to date, unfortu- nately, have remained quiet on this issue, to stand up and speak out on behalf of Edmonton. I am, as is the Liberal caucus, willing to work with those hon. members to ensure Edmonton does not lose a voice in this Assembly.

Thank you. head : Present ing Pet itions The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the working poor in Alberta I’m presenting a petition signed by 53 individuals from Calgary. These Albertans are petitioning the Legislative Assembly to urge the government to immediately raise the minimum wage to $8.50 per hour and index it to the cost of living just in the way MLA salaries are indexed to the cost of living. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Speaker’s Ruling Factual Accuracy The Speaker: Excuse me.

Ho n. members, I don’t know what the provision is with respect to the correction of stuff that’s said in the Assembly that’s w rong. The chair is also the c hairman of the Members’ Services Committee, a nd the l ast sta tement made is factually incorr ect. MLA s alaries are not inde xed to the c ost of living. This has been said in this Assembly several times, and who other than the cha irman of Members’ Services can stand up and correct it? All hon. members know how their stipe nds are ca lcu- lated. It has noth ing to do wi th the cost of living. This has to be clarified. This must be clarified.

That is factually incorrect. Members’ stipends are adjusted on an annual basis on a formula that was determined, an independent formula called the average of weekly earnings index of the previous calendar year of workers in the province of Alberta. Totally unrelated to the cost of living index. The members of this Assembly have got to cl arify. It’s wrong to stand in here and make factually incorrect statements. Dr. Pannu: With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank you for correcting me on this. I should have used the right language. Thank you. head : Notices of Motions The Speaker: The hon.

Minister of Community Development. Mr. Zwo zdesky: Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er. I ris e pursuant to Standing Order 34(2)(

a) to give notice that on Monday I will move that written questions 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 be dealt with that day. I’m also giving notice that on Monday I will move that motions for returns 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 10 be dealt with that day. There being no additional written questions or motions for returns, there are none to stand and retain their places. head : Intro duc tion o f Bills The Speaker: The hon. Member for Grande Prairie-Wapiti. Bill 31 Local Authorities Election Amendment Act, 2003 Mr. Graydon: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I request leave to introduce a bill being the Local Authorities Election Amendment Act, 2003. The act is reviewed approximately every three years. This bill will incorporate changes requested by local authorities since the last local authorities elections. [Motion carried; Bill 31 read a first time] The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hanco ck: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. I m ove that B ill 31 b e moved onto the Order Paper under Government Bills and Orders. [Motion carried] head : Tabling R eturns and R eports The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Seniors. Mr. Woloshyn: Thank you very m uch, Mr.

Speak er. I’d like to table the response to Written Question 4.

March 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 483 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona. Dr. Pannu: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to table five copies of a letter from Gerry Toller-Lobe of Edmonton dat ed March 4, 2003, addressed to the Premier. Mr. Toller-Lobe is expressing his extreme dissatisfaction with the government’s education funding policy and the resulting negative impact on his children attending McKernan school.

They are rem inding the Premier that education is an investment not only in e ducation but in “ health, law and order, productivity, culture and quality of life” for the collective good of society. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have three tablings today.

The first is from constituent Ian Crichton, who writes about P3s, or as he likes to call them, “Picking the Public Pocket.” He’s asking that “the pr ovince of Alberta with am ple acce ss to capital and pride in it s fisc al accounta bility s hould n ot r isk the delivery of the services in our community so deliberately.” My second tabling is from Phillip H.

Walker, who’s asking that the motion passed by city council be tabled, that the mayor on behalf of city council urges the Premier and all members of the Assembly “to direct the Alberta Electoral Boundaries Commission to maintain the status quo in Edmonton.” Finally, Mr. Speaker, there’s a h eartfelt tes timonial fro m a constituent, Jane Doe, who has found herself needing welfare and offers up her critique on the SFI budget. Thank you. The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Thank y ou, Mr. Speak er. I’m getting a trem endous amount of corres pondence these days.

The firs t tabling is from a student at Ross Sheppard high school named Tara Krys, who h as written to me expressing her concern over the services available in schools and the shortage of funding. The second letter is from Lana Cuthbertson, also expressing her concern over funding cuts to education that the province of Alberta is making. The third letter is a copy of a letter written to the public s chool board of Edmonton saying among other things: I’m concerned that my daughter’s education “w ill suff er as a result of the rece nt financial difficulties your schoolboard is facing.” That’s from Dan Musica.

The fourth letter is a copy of a letter sent to me strongly urging the maintenance of Edmonton’s 19 seats in the Legislature. The fifth letter is from a person, Peter Schiavone, who wants to add his voice “to those calling for natural gas rebates – as promised by the [provincial government] last year.” Thank you. 2:50 The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Gold Bar. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have two tablings this afternoon. The first is a letter that I received, and I was delighted to receive this lette r from the hon. Ministe r of Finance.

It’s dated February 24, 2003, and deals with the consultation process to review the auto insurance business in the province of Alberta. The second tabling I have this afternoon is from citizens from the following communities: A thabasca, St. Albe rt, Alber ta Beac h, Onoway, Stony Plain, Edmonton, and Calgary. There are over 200 citizens here urgi ng the gov ernment to “reinstate the natural-gas rebates immediately” that were promised during the election. Thank you. Mr. Mason: Mr.

Speaker, I’m tabling a letter from a retired couple in Two Hills, Alberta, d ated M arch 7 , 200 3, ad dressed to me regarding their gas and power bills. They write, “Enclosed gas and power bills which are taking food from our mouths.” head : Pro jected G over nmen t Busin ess The Speaker: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Centre. Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Pu rsuant to Standing Order 7(5) I would ask that the orde r of gov ernment business to be bro ught befor e the Assembly next week be now shared with the Assembly. The Speaker: The hon. Government House Leader. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. Under projected govern- ment business for the week of March 17 to March 20 we project that on Monday, March 17, under Government Bills and Orders at 9 p.m. for secon d reading B ill 27, Labour Relations (Regional Health Authorities Restruct uring) A mendment Act , 2003, and Bill 30, Appropriation (Interim Supply) A ct, 2003 , and as per the Order Paper.

Tuesday, March 18, in the afternoon under Government Bills and Orders for second reading Bill 27, Bill 18, Energy Statutes Amend- ment Act, 2003, Bill 26, Corrections Amendment Act, 2003, Bill 28, Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Amendment Act, 2003, and potentially Committee of the Whole on Bill 27, and as per the Order Paper. At 8 p.m. on Tuesday, March 18, under Govern- ment Bills and Orders for second rea ding or Comm ittee of the Whole, depending on progress, Bill 27, and committee on bills 19, 30, and 3, and as per the Order Paper.

Wednesday, March 19, in the afternoon under Government Bills and Orders and Committee of the Whole or third rea ding, as the order progresses, bills 19, 27, and 3, and as per the Order Paper. At 8 p.m. under Government Bills and Orders again Committee of the Whole or third reading, as progress is made, on bills 19, 27, 3, and for third reading Bill 30, and as per the Order Paper. Thursday, March 20, in the afternoon under Government Bills and Orders for th ird r eading bill s 19, 27, a nd 3 . If time permi ts, Government Motion 13. head : Orders of t he Day hea d: C omm ittee o f Sup ply [Mr.

Shariff in the chair] The Deputy Chair: We’ll call the committee to order. Inter im Suppl y Esti mates 2003-04 Office s of t he Legis lati ve Assembl y, Government, and Lotte ry Fund The Deputy Chair: The hon. Minister of Community Development. Mr. Zwozdesky: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I rise to comment on the interim supply re quirements for the Department and Ministry of Community Development. I did note in reviewing the Blues last

484 Alberta Hansard March 13, 2003 night – late last night, I might add – that the Member for Edmonton- Centre had placed some questions on the record which she wanted some answers to. I also noticed that she made a comment about the length of time it took to answer some of the questions that followed the main budget debate from last year, and I just want to make a brief comment on that, if you’ll allow, because she has asked the question.

I want to just state at the outset that during the spirit of that exchange with the hon. member during that part of the debate, as I recall, she had requested time during the debate a year ago to put on record as many questions as she possibly could. I agreed to that, and I also agreed to Edmonton-Ellerslie’s request. I can’t remember and I don’t have it just in f ront of me, but I’m sure it wa s close to a hundred questions or thereabouts when I combined two or three of the opposition members’ questions, so it did take quite a long time to provide that.

Now, I’ll handle that situation differently this year, hon. member. I will take up the time during the debate to answer as many questions from you as I can, but in r esponse I t hink I p rovided 34 pages of answers to this hon. member and the other and then a supplementary 17 or 19 pages of answers, and my staff worked very hard to try and provide a s ma ny updated answers as we could. Some of them weren’t ready to go, of course, becau se as I recall, they surfaced around the topic of the G8 summ it.

Some of that was in progress and in motion, so we held back a little bit on the timing just so that we could provide as much of the updated information as we possibly could, making it the most current, in other words. Nonetheless, my staff did try t heir very level best to provide as comprehensive an answer to every single question that was raised by Edmonton-Centre or Edmonton-Ell erslie or one ot her m ember whose name I don’t recall.

So that having been said, we’ll endeavour to do that thorough job again when the appropriate budget debate occurs, and I would hope, hon. members, that it won’t take a number of months to provide, but when you ask that many questions and you have a conscien tious department and staff like I’m privileged to have, some of those answers take longer than anticipated. We only have so many staff members, as does every ministry, so in defence of the ministry and my staff I make those explanations.

Now, specific to some of the issues that were referenced yesterday, I know that there were a number of ite ms that were asked and/or referred to, not necessarily in a question form, during interim supply debate last evening, and I just will clarify again, Mr. Chair, that the request before the House right now is for interim financi ng o r interim funding, bri dge funding if y ou will, t o meet what I could only describe as the short-term needs of the Ministry of Community Development until the 2003-2004 budg et is off icially tabled, discussed, and passed by all members of this House.

I know that there will be some vigorous debate at that time. Specifically, the $209.5 mi llion o r thereabout s in operati ng expense that is being requested and the $265,000 in ca pital invest- ment that’s being requested is being asked for in order to he lp us cover the anticipated needs of the ministry for the period A pril 1, obviously, of 2003 through to approxim ately June 15.

I think everybody in the House probably heard in the debates yesterday that come the end of the fiscal year that we’re currently in, which will be March 31, 2003, we do have a need to facilitate o perations and continue to maintain services for Albertans in all areas from health care to education to infrastructure to transportation and on and on. So, too, is that same statement applicable to Community Develop- ment.

So we w ill be lookin g fo r interim supply doll ars to help us continue providing s ervices such as grant funding for our persons with developmental disabilities boards, which are spread throughout the province, and I’ll comment a little bit more on that shortly. That would constitute for the interim supply period approximately $190 million in grants, and that will include funding to the PDD Provin- cial Board and to t he regiona l boards.

T hat will also cove r our excellent library system and various other grant programs within my ministry’s five lottery-funded agencies. 3:00 So, again, the majority of those funds, Mr. Chair, will go specifi- cally to providing services to the most vulnerable in our society, the PDD recipients, and the s ystem in genera l.

I think it’s probably important to note that since they re ceive t heir funding at the beginning of each month, the request before us includes about three months of supply rather than two and one-half months of supply, but still it’s within those first three months, roughly, that we’re looking for interim dollars to be approved today. The other p oint I referenced was w ith respect to libraries. Libraries operate on a calendar -year basis, Mr .

Chair, so of the applications that come in, many of these requests are received early, so they’re processed as quickly as possible at the beginning of t he fiscal year on a first come, first served basis. I’d say that about 50 percent of all the library grants that we do pay out tend to get paid out within the first quarter, so it’s important that we have that interim money block available s o that w e can conti nue to provide our libraries across the province with the support that they need.

The other point, w ith r espect to the payment schedule, which references other grants within the department and lottery-funded agencies. That varies, and that r eally depends on the type of grant and which specific grant program is being discussed. Some of these, Mr. Chair, do require funding at th e beginning of the year, others require it on a quarterly basis, and some, as the hon. member, I’m sure, will know, require it on a biannual basis. So there are varying time frames here that we’re having to deal with.

But specific to the amount being debated today for interim supply, this amount that’s being requested is based on our best known practices. Let ’s call them historical spending patterns, if you like. They reflect what we judge to be the anticipated needs for the period April 1 through to, again, about June 15 of 2003. So that tends to cover most of the 191 million or so dollars that were referred to yesterday. The other points are with respect to salaries, Mr. Chairman.

No department, no ministry is able to function without staff, obviously, and when we look at sta ff in C ommunity Development, who are spread out through most of the province – and, obviously, a lot are also headquartered here – we will require approximately $8.7 million to cover the salaries for the staff members that I’m so privileged to be able to work with. There’s also, I shoul d add here, a bout $265,000 that i s bein g required for capital investment for parks facilities.

I think members of the House w ill obviously know tha t our parks tend to be t he busiest duri ng th e spri ng, su mmer, and early fall se asons, so in addition to the $265,000 for capital investment in the parks facilities, this interim request also r eferences I b elieve about $7 mi llion fo r supplies and services, which includes normal operating needs as well as some additional funding that is normally required to get the start- up of our parks going and making sure that they’re ready for the very busy summer season that lies ahead.

There will be, of course , more i nformation provided o nce th e budget is tabled, and I know we’ll get into quite some discussion on that. But the members of the Assembly along with all Albertans will be privy to those details when the budget is ha nded down, and I believe that will be on Apri l 8 this y ear. Now, with that in mind, there were some specific questions that were asked, and I’ll try and get through as many of them as I can in the time available.

March 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 485 There was a question w ith respec t to grant r elease dates. Mr. Chair, the grant programs of the f ive lottery-funded agencies will continue to operate as usual and in accordance with the time lines and the time frames that we have for grant applications, and we’re not expecting any changes to that. T he interim request before us takes into consideration the anticipated amounts that will be required for all payments, be they operating grants or project grants or what have you, as well as other operational and capital needs items.

The amount of interim supply for grants was calculated, as I said earlier, using previous spending patterns that we have a history with, and we expect that to be the same in 2003-2004. With respect to library grants, Mr. Chair, should there b e an y specific changes to the library grants, those would be announced in the 2003 budget. Proce ssing of library operating g rants remains unchanged. I think that was one of the items referenced.

Cheques are released after libraries submit applications and we’ve completed our final ve rifications, and I’ll a dd that applic ations are , again, processed on a first come, first served basis. It probably should be noted for the A ssembly that b eginning in 2001-2002, the curre nt population figures based on Municipal Affairs’ official popul ation list from the previous year have bee n used to ca lculate g rant payments for libraries, and I expect that will continue.

With respect to PDD members here should know that the depart- ment – that is to say, Community Development – transfers funds that are allocated to us for that purpose to the PDD Provincial Board, and that’s don e on a mon thly basis. After that, the PDD Provincial Board immediately forwards agreed-to amounts to the individual regional boards, and we have six of them throughout the province of Alberta, who work very hard to provi de services for persons with developmental disabilitie s.

Now, the provinci al board w ill be working with r egional and community boards to devel op specific plans and determine sp ecific a llocations based on a lot of factors, such as projected caseload growth, projected increases in the cost of providing services to individuals, projected costs o f incr eased complexities of cases, and so on. More specifics, obviously, will flow out once the budget is tabled. The ot her com ment is with res pect to the Auditor’s opinion regarding the so-ca lled frie nds-of o rganizations that Com munity Development does busines s with.

Th is refl ects com ments w ith respect to reven ues and expenses and so on. The fact is that those aren’t included rig ht now wi thin the areas that the me mber refer- enced, but I would s ay this. It’s the ministry’s opinion that th e volunteer societies, the friends-of, that we’re dealing with are legally incorporated not-for-profit organizat ions under the Soc ieties Act, and as such they are independent from government operations, and I think they should continue to enjoy that independence.

Therefore, their financial statements are not automatically incorporated into my ministry’s budget or my ministry’s financial statements. But it’s a fair question for the member to ask, and in respo nse I would only add, Mr. Chair, that we are continuing to have this dialogue with the office of the Auditor General to see if there’s some other way that we can accommodate our needs as a min istry, that we can acc urately reflect the independence and arm’s lengthness and all o f that stuff which the friends-of groups enjoy as wel l as issue s raised by the Auditor General.

I would say that the recording of deferred contributions that may have been alluded to was done in accordance with generally accepted accounting prin ciples bec ause t hese mo neys we re re ceived as restricted donations. Spe cifically t o the hon. me mber’s question regarding unreturned sur pluses of I think it w as $223,000 in the context of grants to the friends-of societies, I would like to clarify that the ministry does not provide those societies with those kinds of grants.

Theref ore, the am ount of $223,000 that m ay have been referenced was not recor ded in th e fi nancial sta tements of the ministry since they were still being retained by the various societies who operated the particular historic sites which, again, may hav e been referenced. There was a question with regard to expenses of capital assets of less than $15,000 and the request for some details. I would just add, Mr.

Chair, that my ministry follows the governmentwide policy and directives in this regard, an d the way that we’ve been doing this is very compliant with the policies referred to. 3:10 The f inal issue is with r espect to the centenni al legacies grant program. As all members in the House will know – and I answered part of this question earlier this week in the Assembly – the centen- nial program had a phase 1, that occurred in September 2000, and then it had a phase 2, which carried an application deadline of March 1, 2001.

Now, it was a lways refe rred to that the phase 2 grant applications would be de alt with and, hopefull y, announce d by September 30, 2001. Unfortunately, the tragic incidents of Septem- ber 11 put all of that on hold. The centennial grant program had to be deferred, and as a result it still remains deferred. We’ve received numerous grant applications for that program, and we’ve received numerous requests asking: when will the centennial grant program be undeferred? My answer to that would be: I hope it will be sooner than later. The centennial of this province will be a great event.

As m inister responsible for not only the centen nial legacies grant program but also f or the anniv ersary celebra tions themselves and for a ll of the g ood things that w ill be happeni ng throughout our province during that year and particularly focusing on Se ptember 1, 2005, I for one am v ery s upportive of doing everything we possibly can to help the communities. The communi- ties have shown tremendous initiative, I should add, and have gotten on with a lot of their own projects in the meantime.

But the request for the centennial program to be undeferred remains on the table, and details on any possibilities of the centennial grant prog ram being reinstated, including any budget amounts, if at all, as applicable will certainly have to wait until the budget gets tabled in early April. We don’t have any way of advis ing any members of t his House right now as to what the time frame of phase 2 applications may be, but as I sai d, I ho pe the deci sion to undefe r or what ever will be m ade sooner than later.

I think there are specifics that members were looking for or that at least one hon. me mber was looking for, and s ome of those are , indeed, much more specific than I would be allowed to comment on at this tim e, but I ca n assure t he mem ber that the y wi ll all be addressed when the budget is tabled on or about April 8 or shortly thereafter, Mr. Chair. So with that, I will cede the floor to other members who may wish to ask questions about othe r departments. I’ve given out about as much information as I’m at liberty to do at this time.

So thank you for your kind attention, and thank you to the Member for Edmonton- Centre for her questions yesterday during interim supply debate. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Highlands. Mr. Mason: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I’m pleased to rise on the interim supply estimates, although I want to put on the record my concern tha t we’re not in fac t debating t he budget. There’s somethi ng funny here w ith th e government delaying the budget so long.

I don’t know what they’re actually up to, but it’s something, and I’m sure that it will be clear to us after the budget is actually brought down, when it finally is. Mr. Chai rman, I have a number of questions and comments

486 Alberta Hansard March 13, 2003 interspersed on any number of d epartments contained in these interim supply estimates. I’ll just begin, and hopefully the appropri- ate ministers will be able to resp ond at som e time , if not this afternoon then afterwards, perhaps in a written form. I have questions for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. I’d like to know how much will be spent tracking livestock illnesses such as mad cow dise ase and f oot-and-mouth disease.

I’d like to know that if t here’s more dro ught, which seems likely , what measures will be t aken to s pecifically protect family farms rather than to subsidize large corporate farms. I would like to know why the governm ent reve rsed its pos ition on subsidizing agricultural leaseholds, which has formerly been called cowboy welfare, between the never proclaimed Bill 31 and Bill 16, which is now before the Assembly.

In terms of Children’s Services I would be interested in knowing how much the abominable adoption-by-eBay web site has cost and whether or not taxpayers will be expected to continue paying for this atrocity. Last year there was a total reduction in budgeted spending on early childhood intervention of $6,277,000, or 17.56 percent, less than the year before. I’d like to know if the minister is committed to restoring that funding .

I would li ke to know how ma ny support agreements or apprehensions the department has had to ena ct because preventative measures, such as early childhood intervention programs, have not been in place. Mr. Chairman, I’d just like to speak to this a little bit.

Alberta has a high level of apprehensions of children, and it’s one of the reasons why the government has a large number of children in care, in foster homes and so on, and it would seem better to me if the government would concentrate on preventative programs to support the families in the first place so that children need to be apprehended much less frequently rather tha n apprehending lot s of c hildren beca use the families don’t have support and then marketing them for adoption on web sites. I’d like to know how much the support agreements cost last year and how much we can expect to pay this year.

Now, I know that Bill 24 ha s placed a greate r empha sis on permanent placements for children in c are. This appears to be an intention al shift in phi losophy. A represe ntative of the Albe rta College of Social Workers has raised concerns that c hild welfare reforms and reform programs for families of children with disabili- ties are ultimately designed to reduce costs for Children’s Services. So if children are adopted or placed with permanent guardians, then the financial responsibility of the department is reduced.

I’d like to know how much the department expects to save with their emphasis on permanent placements. Bill 24 will also put a 30-day cap on secure treatment for youths with serious addictions, and t hat’s reduced from a cap of 90 d ays currently. I’d like to know what the expec ted savings are for that measure, and I’d lik e to know why, if ther e is not a s ignificant saving, the cap needs to be legislated in the first place. Some questions, Mr. Chairman, for Community Development. I’d like to know whether or not more money will be allocated to hir e investigators at the Human Rights and Citizenship Commission.

I’d like to know why human rights complaints take so long to resolve. I’d like to know what Community Development is or will be doing to combat increased incidences of racism after 9-11. I would like to know what Community Development will do to assist community leagues whose funding has already been reduced by cuts to munici- pal grants.

I don’t need to tell anyone here who represents an urban constituency the importance of community leagues to the well-being of the community and the excellent work they do, which I daresay saves municipalities and the provincial government a great deal of costs because of the hard work of the volunteers in those organiza- tions. I’d like to come now to the Department of Energy, and I’d like to ask a question, a nd perhaps, Mr. Chairman, at this st age it would have to be considered a rhetorical question. When can we expect gas rebates?

I would li ke a com mitment from the gove rnment that if rebates are not going to be implemented now, halfway between the last election a nd the next o ne, because gas pr ices haven’t hit the trigger, I would like assurances that the government isn’t going to change the trigger just in time for the next election and allow gas rebates before the next election. I’d really appreciate it if we could get the minister or some officia l from the g overnment to put that commitment clearly on the record.

We spent $2 billion on rebates before the election, and that’s, I think, just dealing with the gas side, yet Albertans have paid $3 billion in higher rates since the election. So the net cost to Albertans both thro ugh p aying fo r thei r own rebates and the higher prices that they have to pay as well is a very, very large amount of money. 3:20 How much more will the Department of Energy have to spend on getting the electricity deregulation policy to actually work? We’d like to kno w how much deregulation of natural gas will cost consumers. The Consumers’ Coalition of A lberta has found, Mr.

Chairman, through surv eys a nd focus g roups that the re was no consumer desire for gas deregulation. I think that’s a very interest- ing point. The consumers did not want gas deregulation. [interjec- tion] The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview seems interested in that statement, and he agrees with it. I am also not surprised to find that consumers didn’t ask for deregulation of gas, just like they didn’t ask for deregulation of electricity. It’s an interesting contrast to those statements that are made in this Assembly that consumers want choice .

Sure, th ey’d like to have choice, but now they can choose between which package of high prices they want to have rather tha n no cho ice and g et cheap a nd reliable energy. So I think t hat’s the consumer perspective on the whole thing, Mr. Chairman. Certainly my constituency office and that of the hon. Member for Edmonton-Strathcona have not hear d any demands for gas deregulation. I wonder if any other members have had calls to their constituency offices from individual citizens demanding gas deregulation. [interjections] That’s interesting.

A number of members are saying: no, they have not received any calls whatsoever for gas deregulation. Well, it seems, then, that the only people who w ant gas d eregulation ar e ver y i deologically driven Conservatives, and I guess Direct Energy probably wants it too. I know that the pow er com panies, including the much-maligned EPCOR, also favour deregulation, an d I think that’s because they want to make a whole lot more money than they are, and I think that they’ll be able to.

I guess the next quest ion I’d like to ask is whether or not the Minister of Energy will table before the Assembly documents from any organization that has asked f or deregul ation of eithe r gas or electricity and, as w ell, the c orrespondence from Direct Energy. Since it’s appar ent that indiv idual Albe rtans them selves are not asking for dere gulation of gas and pow er, then I w ould be very curious to know who is. So I’d ask the minister if he’d be prepared to put that correspondence before the Assembly.

Now, I would like to know who the government is going to buy their gas from in the next period of time, whether or not it’s going to be Direct Energy or some other company, and I’d like to know what additional bi lling costs we’re going to ha ve in order to support Direct Energy. We’d also be re ally int erested to know w hether or not t he government is prepared to set up any sort of program to assist people to make their homes more energy efficient. There are a number of

March 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 487 approaches to this. One approach which was used in the city of Edmonton in connection with water was to create a revolving fund that allowed people to make investments in water reduction, and then the fund was repaid from the savings that those individuals accrued. It’s an excellent approach, Mr. Chairman, becau se investing in energy saving technologies and simple energy reduction techniques can actually save a lot of money.

If you look at it as an investment, then you can actually r eplenish an initial investment many time s over, so it’s a very, very positive approach to take. Now, I guess the next departmen t I come to is the Env ironment department, Mr. Chairman. I’d like to know how much money is going to be allocat ed to impl ementing Kyoto. T hen I would appreciate it if the government could compare that to the amount of time or the amount of money spent trying to sabotage Kyoto. I think that would be a very interesting comparison.

The government was obviously very, very interested in stopping Kyoto and got everybody whipped into a frenzy. Then when Kyoto was passed by the federal Parliament anyway, all of a sudden the government said: well, you know, it’s really not going to hurt us very much, and we’ll monitor the situation. So they clearly were crying wolf, and w e all know what happened eventually to the little boy who cried wolf. He got eaten by one, or at least he should have. So I think that the govern- ment should watch out for the wolf. I’m going to come to the money spent on lawyers when we get to the Justice department. Dr.

Taft: How much was that? Mr. Mason: Hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview, I believe that it was half a million dollars, and that’s an awful lot of money. We still don’t know which lawyers got it or what they did. We do know that it probably didn’t go to injury lawyers, but much more than that we don’t really know. I’d like to know whether or not the government has studied and is prepared to report to th e Assembly on the impac ts of inten sive livestock operations on the environment. As we know, this was an area of considerable concern. I won’t go into the statistics that we gathered, Mr.

Chairman, about the volumes of pig manure that will be produced once the Premier has his way and we have millions and millions of hogs in this province, but I think that to err on the side of the environment, we really ought to know how these operations have affected the environment so far, the groundwater in particular. I’d like to know if the Department of Environment w ill commit to an independent review of the impact of intensive livestock operations on nearby ecosystems, on drinking water, and on air quality. I have a f ew ques tions for t he Departm ent of Fina nce, Mr. Chairman, as well.

I’d like to know why the budget is so late. I’d like to know why the Finance department continues to intentionally underestimate revenue, particularly royalty revenue. I’d like to know how muc h the government will be giving aw ay in corporate tax breaks this year. That’s another interesting question. You know, Mr. Chairman, I have here a list of t he amount by which the government has lowballed its revenues since 1993-94. It’s averaged well over a billion dollars a year, and we’re projecting it’s going to be close to $3 billion this year.

In that pe riod of time – I think that’s about 10 years – the government has lowballed its revenues by $23 .3 bil lion. It’s no wonder they have all these surpluses, and of cour se they’ve gone 75 percent against the debt. So by underest imating that revenue, th ey’ve managed to star ve programs and accelerate the paying down of the debt. I’d like to ask the Ministry of Gaming how much they’re going to be giving to the horse racing industry this year. I’d like to know how much they’re spending on VLT maintenance and upgrades.

I’d like to know how much th ey’re going to be spending on s upport for people with gambling problems. I’d like to know whether Gaming will continue to support core programs such as health and wellness. 3:30 Now, for Government Services, Mr. Chairman, I’d like to know if it’s going to continue the unfair user -pay model that it’s imple- mented with all kinds of multiplying user f ees, given the gov ern- ment’s promise that there won’t be any tax increas es. Does the government consider user fees to be a tax or not?

I’d like to know if we still need to worry about people stealing the materials needed to forge drivers’ licences in this province . I think tha t’s a serious concern that we have. Mr. Chairman, I would like to come to Health and Wellness. I’d like to know w hether A lbertans c an finall y expe ct to see th e elimination of Alberta health care premium s this y ear. I’m not holding my breath, but, y ou know, w ith a n elec tion comin g, we know that eve rything changes , and ma ybe th e gove rnment w ill actually take a look at that.

I’d like t o k now if t he minis ter is prepared to increase the income levels for premium subsidy at least. I’d like to know if there will be funds to restore the enhanced optical and health benefits for seniors. That was a real blow to the seniors when they lost that, and a lot of people have had a lot of difficulty as a result. I’d like to ask whether the minister will increase the low- income cutoff for seniors’ assistance. And will the minister commit to supporting midwives?

I’d like to know whether the government will be introducing more programs to help with smoking cessation an d whether or not these programs match the incr eased revenue from higher tobacco taxes. People may recall that I voted against that particular provision, even though I’ve opposed smoking in my entire political life, because it was a simply a tax grab from low-income people who are much more inclined to smoke and there was no indication that the extra tax grab revenue would actually be used to help people quit smoking. Clearly it’s not. It’s just going to the bottom line.

I’d like to know if there are any other programs that are being introduc ed to help peopl e make positive health choices. Now, Human Resources and Employment. I have a few questions for them. I ’d like to know, given the recent surplus, whether this will finally be the year that AISH and SFI recipients can expect an increase. I’d like to know how much the government saves per year by not affording people a decent quality of life. I’d like to know why the minister hasn’t pushed for a fair taxation system that would allow him to afford AISH or SFI increases.

We’d like to know whether or not there ar e instance s of ca seworkers in A ISH and SF I bein g seriously overburdened. For the Minister of Justice and Attorney General I’d like to know how much money was spent on fighting Kyoto, and I’d like to know if he has plans to spend more this year. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The Deputy Chair: Hon. member, the allocated time has run out. The Hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General. Mr. Hancock: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I know the hon. member had more questions on the Justice issue than just Kyoto, so I’ll look forward to those questions when they come up, but he will have had the opportunity, of cou rse, t o deb ate in full i n sup plementary estimates not two weeks ago the supplementary estimate that was requested for the Depar tment o f Justice and Attorney G eneral relative to a su m of $50 0,000 which was i n this year’s estimates relative to the acqu isition of outside legal a dvice re lative t o the matter of the Kyoto prot ocol. I’ve i ndicated b oth i n ans wering

488 Alberta Hansard March 13, 2003 questions in the House and in debate on supplementary supply and elsewhere that we have, of course, a considerabl e con tingent in- house relative to our constitutional law area. We’ve put a consider- able amount of work in ove r the course of the f all in term s of providing legal advice to government on the Kyoto matter. Kyoto, as all Albertans are only too acutely aware, is of extreme significance to our provinc e in term s of the f act that we have a carbon-based economy, an economy that is very much supported by oil and gas, coal.

Our electricity is generated prim arily from coal and gas, so implementing a protocol relative to so-called greenhouse gases could have a very serious effect. So Alberta took a very strong and very important position with respect to the protocol. We always maintained that we were not opposed to doing something about the environment and environmental issues, and certainly we believed there needed to be a plan relative to greenhouse gases.

In fact, Alberta moved more quickly than any other jurisdiction in the country to establish Climate Change Central, to move and work very closely on the voluntary challenge process, to work with other jurisdictions across the country on a co-operative federal ism basis with respect to how to meet the K yoto cha llenge.

But w hen the Prime Minister of this country went to Johannesburg, South Africa, and announced unilaterally to the surprise of his own government – and not just to their surprise but to the surprise of everybody across the country – what his ti metable was and that he inte nded to do it without a plan, i t behooved us to move very quickly to make sure that we understood the full legal implications of every step of that process, whether it was the process of approving the protocol or the process that might come afterwards with respect to implementation of the protocol, w hat our consti tutional po sition was, w hat our position ought to be with respect to legislation, and what corporate advice we might give to government with respec t to the risks that Alberta faced relative to the whole Kyoto question.

So the am ount of m oney tha t was pr ovided in supple mentary supply, the additional $500,000, was to cover some of the costs that were incurred, both the ext ernal costs and the additional internal costs that were dealt with. I can say that I think the external bills – and I d on’t have t he exact number a t hand – to date were in the nature of some $300,000 to $350,000. I can provide that number if the member is concerned about the specifics of it.

As we go for ward, we’re talking about interim supply for next year, and the money that’s in the budget for next year will of course cover any adv ice that w e need to prov ide. T he question a s to whether or not the quantity of money that will be needed to deal with the Kyoto protocol will bear a great deal of relationship to whether the federal government finally comes up with any specifics relative to how they intend to im plement the protocol and what wor k we need to do relative to that implementation process.

So I can’t give the member any more definitive answer than that with respect to the specifics of the numbers, but I can assure him that we will be vigilant.

We will make sure that we have good research and good knowledge of all those whic h we m ight be re asonably expected to be engaged in and that we will continue to provide legal advice relativ e to legis lation that m ight be broug ht forward, any potential challenges that might be made if and when appropriate and only if and when appropriate, but more than that, the baseline under any discussion relative to moving forward with the implementation of the protocol and how it might affect Alberta.

I wanted t o just com ment briefly because the Minister of Chil- dren’s Services is attending a federal/provincial/territorial ministers’ meeting. I know there may be oth ers in the House who will speak directly to her est imates, but I wa nted to respon d to the q uestion relative to, and more appropriately the derogatory note relative to, how he reference d th e eBay web sit e. Just to put on the recor d again, as the Minister of Children’ Services has done so often in the past, the fact that we have children in this province who are in need of good homes and in need of loving par ents.

A ny member who wants to criticize in that area – and critique is a good thing; it’s not a bad thing – s hould be careful in terms of how they approach critique in an area if th ey’re not prepare d to step f orward and do something, and there are children who need parents. The Wednesday’s Child program, using the television and using newspapers, has been in this province for a lot of years, and it’s been a very successful program. Using technology to he lp make things better is not a bad thing. It’s a good thing as long a s it’s done appropriately.

Making sure that people know of the need for more people who are in a position to step forward and provide a goo d home for children in this province is a very good thing. 3:40 I can’t provide the member with the specifics with respect to the cost of the web site, which was, when he got through the rhetoric, the gist of his question, and I’m sure the Minis ter of Children’s Services will be happy to prov ide whatever detail is av ailable on that, but I could not let the remark go by without comment. The web site has proved successful.

People have taken more of an interest as a result of having that information available. There were a couple of issues that neede d to b e addresse d and wer e address ed by the Minister of Children’s Services relative to certain children who were on the web site, but overall it’s proved to be a very positive tool to, again, increase the awareness of Albertans of the nee d to provide good homes for children who need it, when they are in a position to do so, and to prov ide access to the inf ormation and to encour age more people to be involved in that process.

So I would hope that he would in future, in dealing with issues of that kind of sensitivity and that kind of a nat ure . . . C ertainly, needing information and critiquing process is a fair part of what we do and certainly a fair part of what the opposition does, but that web site is not a marketplace or an eBay or any commercial venture of that nature. It ’s a method, a ve ry legitimate way of gett ing good information to people who need that information and to encourage people to be interested in children of this province who need their help.

If they can provide that help, giving them the information and encouraging them to t ake advantage of that opportunity is a good thing, not a bad thing. The hon. mem ber als o m entioned som e issues with res pect to Community Developm ent. I’m sure the m inister m ay w ish t o provide infor mation on that, but he com mented on one area that I wanted to deal wit h, and that w as with respect t o assista nce to community leagues.

Now, I’ m not aware of provinc ial grants to community leagues other than through the very successful commu- nity facility enhancement progra m and the new and, again, v ery successful community initiatives program , but both of those programs are available for community leagues, and certainly I know that the community leagu es in my region make go od use of those programs to provide facilities for their communities.

I would co ncur with the hon. member that community leagues, particularly in the Edmonton experience that I’m familiar with, are a very, very strong builder of the community, and the programs that this government has put in place through the community faci lity enhancement program and through the community initiatives program serve to enhance and have been well utilized by community leagues to do that. Community leagues in terms of their other funding and finances are really, well, c reatures of the c ommunity, but the y get support from the citie s.

So I’m not sur e where he was coming from with respect to grants for community leagues or support for community

March 13, 2003 Alberta Hansard 489 leagues, but I can think of no better support than that which is there now through the community facility enhancement program and the community initiatives program. The Deputy Chair: The hon. Member for Edmonton-Riverview. Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Can I just be made clear on how much time – is it 15 minutes or 20 minutes? The Deputy Chair: Twenty minutes. Dr. Taft: Oh, that’s fun. Thank you very much. Mr. Graydon: You don’t have to use it all if you don’t want to. Dr. Taft: Oh, I thought I had to use it all. Don’t I?

I kn ow that I share the concerns of all the m embers in the opposition and, I have no doubt, the concerns of any number of other members on the government side with this entire process that we’re faced with today. We ar e being asked here to approv e legislation expending over $5 billion with no supporting detail. I understand, of course, that it’s interim supply. Mr. Mason: Do we trust them? Dr. Taft: The Member for Edmonton-Highlands is wondering if we trust them, a nd I guess we have no choice. Well, we do have a choice. We will be skeptical. That’s our job, and it’s needed. It’s needed.

So we’re expected to approve over $5 billion of spending that is itemized in total in about, I think, five pages, a billion dollars a page. In fact, I think it’s only four pages. I know that none of us in the opposition, certainly in the Liberal opposition, I imagine in the third party as well, are comfortable with that – it’s simply mind- boggling – and I’m sure that t he genera l public won’ t be too impressed with that either. I cannot imagine any significa nt sized organization running like this. I can’t imagine a multibillion-dollar corporation running like this.

I can’t imagine even a good sized nonprofit organization or a c ommunity league or a small business running with this sort of approach, and it is very worrisome. The people of Denmark have an interesting saying that is of some relevance here. They say that one must walk a long time behind a wild duck before one picks up an ostrich feather. In looking at this document, it is a bit like a wild duck, and we’re searching through it looking for something good, some ostrich feather somewhere, and I’m afraid we’re going to run out of time before we find any.

It is maybe not only a wild duck but a bit of a lame duck, maybe an ugly duckling too. So I expres s a lot of frustra tion here, a nd that fru stration is reinforced when I go through the Hansard of last night’s debate for I as the health critic have many questions about how the $1.8 billion that’s requested in this legislation for the Department of Health and Wellness is going t o be spent. I nstead of any hope whatsoever of having that information provided, I see from last night’s debate that the Minister of Health and Wellness has said that he’s not going to do that.

I think it’s important enough here to quote from last night ’s debate. I’m quoting the Minister of Health and Wellness. I ask for interim funding of $1.85 billion, enough to pay for health care until the end of June. This is prebudget funding, so like others who have commente d on this issu e, I cann ot gi ve det ails now. Those will be available postbudget. So he is not prepared and indeed he says that he cannot –it’s not that he will not; he cannot – give details now.

He goes on to say a few sentences l ater, “Details on my f inal budget and how it i s allocated will no t be a vailable until budget day,” April 8, 20 03, which is abou t three weeks from now. He finally concluded his brief comments – and that’s all he made; the only comments he made last night are a few paragra phs worth addressing almost $2 billion. He concluded by saying: The delay in our provincial budget is unavoidable if we are to table a budget that best meets the needs of this province and the people who live and work here.

Interim funding for health care is equally essential so hea lth se rvices can co ntinue uni nterrupted unti l th e budget is tabled. Well, I don’t doubt that we need to find money to keep the health system going, and nobody on this side of the House is going to argue that we shouldn’t, but the process is fundamentally broken here. I’ve heard other ministers use this terminology today, that they cannot – they cannot – pro vide details until the budget is droppe d.

Then I wonder if we aren’t in a situation w here in e ffect they w ould be violating parliamentary procedure in terms of anticipating the budget by giving details. If that is the case, then I wonder why we’re here in the Legislature debating this at all. The effect here is that we might as well return to t he system of special warrants that was in operation for many years under th e Conservative government. It was, of course, the current Premier. I think he insisted, he promised, he swore that he wouldn’t use special warrants, but in eff ect that’s what w e’ve got here.

W e’ve got a request for $1.8 billion, yet we have n o ability for m eaningful discussion of that money in this Legislature. So let’s call a spade a spade. Let’s be honest here and maybe just handle it through special warrants. At lea st t hat way th ere wo uldn’t be an y pretext of meaningful legislative debate on these issues. That’s my view on this. 3:50 I’m also distressed about the whole process because of the Auditor General’s recommendations, and I’m now ref erring to the annual report of the Auditor General of Alberta 2001-2002.

Recommenda- tion 1, Improve Internal Controls: “We recommend that the Depart- ment of Finance, working with the other departments and the Alberta Corporate Service Centre, improve internal controls.” It goes on to list a series of specifics. Then it goes on a couple of pages later, recommendation 2: We recommend that t he Deputy Minister of Executive Cou ncil, working with o ther De puty Ministers, establish an internal audit function to provide assurance that significant government systems and risks are managed effectively. Risk management.

Here we are being asked to approve $1.8 billion in health fundi ng alone, $5 bi llion in total f unding with no detail. Talk about risk and a breakdown in risk management. Then recommendation 3 from the Auditor General: We recommend that the Min istry of Finance, working with other ministries, develop comprehensive standards for preparing ministry business plans. We further recommend that Deputy Ministers and the Ministry of Finance ensure the standards are followed. Yet here we are in a situation where we are approving more or less 25 percent of next y ear’s budget w ith no signif icant detail, none whatsoever.

It’s unacceptable, and I need that to be absolutely and perfectly clear on the record. We’ve been arguing for years in the opposition that there’s a much better way to manage the provincial budget system , and maybe – maybe – this gove rnment w ill move in that dir ection. The y’re showing some signs of doing so. But, frankly, I’m very concerned, and I’d be prepa red to bet tha t next y ear the budg et will be late again. Maybe the Minister of Finance can tell me exactly what year was the last year in which the budget was v oted on and approved

490 Alberta Hansard March 13, 2003 before the beginning of the fiscal year. It would be useful to know. It wasn’t last year, and I know it wasn’t the year before. It hasn’t been as long as I’ve b een in th is Assembly, which is al l of three years, but I’d be interested to know as a matter of fact when it was. Now, we’ve argued for a radically different approach to managing the budget process, and to the government’s credit they are gradually coming around to our per spective. Their w isdom is growing, but they have a long way to go before they catch up to us.

What we’ve argued for, first of all, is to stabilize the wild m isses in estimating resource revenues, to work from a five-year moving average based on the previous five-years’ resource revenues so that we can smooth out these spikes and valleys in resource revenues and increase the accuracy of our resource revenue projections. As the Member for Edmonton-Highlands was saying a few minutes ago, we have, I think he said, in the last 10 years missed the target on resource revenue projections by over $20 billion. That’s a staggering problem. Mr. Norris: If he said it, it must be true, eh? Dr.

Taft: The Minister of Economic Development is wondering if it’s true. It would be easy to confirm that. Mr. Norris: That’s your source? Dr. Ta ft: That’s one of my sources, yeah. What’s yours? I’ m wondering what the Minister of Economic Development’s source is around this. [interjection] He doesn’t have any.